skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yup, assuming the Finale with rob is all there is to it. A couple of them were trickier (like in level 9, it was really not clear at all what the right output was supposed to be at first), but none of them seemed all that hard. None of them actually felt "fun".

I think it mostly felt less polished due to things like the lack of music and the fact that Go itself is a bad language for this sort of thing.

In Untrusted, there were often places where you could monkey-patch objects and come up with really creative solutions. There were some problems that I felt like I really had freedom to be creative.

In this game, the imports were always out of bounds for editing, so I could never pull in 'unsafe' and have any real fun. All the solutions felt far too restrictive. Sure, there were multiple ways to hack around things, but it never felt like there was room for a spark of real creative joy.

I think go is just a bad language for "fun". It's not optimized for being able to write interesting or elegant code. It's not optimized for having fun.
And how does the difference between IEEE-754 1/x and SSE reciprocal instruction on the same CPU is relevant to Intel disabling AVX/AVX2 on AMD CPUs?

So your logic is: given that IEEE-754 1/x and SSE rcpps yield different results on a single Intel CPU, then... AMD's AVX implementation cannot be the same as Intel's AVX implementation and therefore, Intel is perfectly correct in disabling AVX on AMD?
The problem is that critical thinking is essentially a negative activity. It's a means of defending oneself against potentially harmful ideas or ideas that one simply doesn't like. It's also rather abstract. One can't learn to think critically until one has learnt to think. One can't learn to think at all until he has first learnt some ideas to think about.

To engage the human mind (and the human heart) one needs something positive to aim for. That's why I think that the best approach is not to pick and choose among ideas and then make certain subjects compulsory (as in a curriculum). Rather find something that interests a child and then figure out how to do more of it. But this is best pursued outside the school system.
Same thing that happens to any dying town. Decrease in property values and decrease in quality of life.
In userland, for one. Or an unprivileged service in a microkernel O/S. There are a lot of concerns jammed into the current concept of filesystem.
Yes.. fda approves combination pills seperate to each drug on it's own. While i'm not a pharmacologist, it dies seem odd
> Reconstructions of pakicetids that followed the discovery of composite skeletons often depicted them with fur; however, given their relatively close relationships with hippos, they may have had sparse body hair.

Maybe a pig-like-opossum?

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Pakicetus
There are several points here where you assume that as an engineer, you need to learn to do another job entirely, here:

>This paragraph encompases the job title of business analyst, project manager and business intelligence.

>Let’s just assume I do have time in my workday for developer, business analyst, project manager, business intelligence and business strategy.

Here:

>Architect, strategy, consultant. EZPZ I am 10x.

Here:

>I thought I was the only one with the time needed to handle ~ 10 roles to perfection.

Here:

> It’s ok, I just need to brush up on my data science. 51% filled.

Here:

>I don’t need no CEO, CFO, CIO and / or ang form of c-level. I got this guys.

>There’s something missing though, my 8 hours are filled with so many roles and I am still bored. I know!

And here:

>Can’t wait to brush up on my design and UX, luckily I already know Data Science and Operations from my other roles.

But I think the point you're missing is that you don't need to do all those jobs fulltime, you just need to have a baseline level of understanding of the underlying principles and needs of those roles. Which isn't that crazy - the "product manager"/"product owner" roles are a smorgasbord of skills and responsibilities, and most people who fill those roles aren't experts in every single skill and responsibility, just like every engineer isn't an expert in both kernel code and frontend frameworks.

The way I see it, the "product engineer" is between a product manager and a full stack engineer - someone with a certain level of understanding of different parts of the code, and different parts of the business, but not an expert at any. A generalist whose generalist skills go beyond just the engineering domain, but that doesn't mean they're specialized in all of those skills.

Is it easy to acquire all of those skills, even to the generalist level needed to be useful even though you're not an expert? No, of course not. But you also don't have to do it all at once. Doing any of the items on this list can add value, and once you get used to doing it, it's part of your daily routine. Then you pick up something else. It adds up over time.
I 100% would be able to solve this problem without seeing it before. Yes, this is because I've practiced a lot of algorithm problems (and I enjoy them, frankly).

Yes, this is hackable, but relying on resumes like every other industry (which is implicitly relying on hoop-jumping and college prestige and GPA) is a much worse form of hackable. This levels the playing field and is a signal for (1) how smart someone is and (2) how much they prepared for the interview, both of which are weakly related to the job. Further, people who excel at algorithm are very unlikely to be bad at the kind of work at big tech.

It's not perfect, but finding something better at scale is hard.
Sorry, I responded to the wrong thread.
Serious question, because I'm not very well-versed in open-source philosophy.

Isn't this around the time that you make a fork of the zombie?
In a very similar vein is Bryan Caplan's book "the Case Against Education."

In an interview[1] he lays out his argument, roughly, as:

> Right. So, the first story is called human capital, and just says that people with more education earn more money because they have been trained effectively for the jobs they are going to do. So, school--you go to school, and it gives you more skills; you make more money. Nice simple story.

> The main story that I am pushing in the book is called signaling. This says that, yes, going to school does cause your earnings to go up; but, the reason isn't so much that you are learning useful skills as that you are getting certified. You are getting a stamp on your forehead saying, 'Great; hey, premium worker. Hire this person.'

> And then, the last story is called ability bias. This one just says that it's just coincidental that people who have more education make more money; and rather, what's going on is it's the kind of thing that wealthy people--the people who are going to be wealthy--rather do.

[1]: https://www.econtalk.org/bryan-caplan-on-the-case-against-ed...
Which means experts in the field were qualified to call bullshit on, say, Galileo or Copernicus? Sometimes entire fields are themselves based on bullshit, until a better theory comes along.

I don't think it's this extreme in this case, and the parent provided some good elaborating context elsewhere, but do remember to stay humble and open.
My point is 'out of range' is different when you use steel. The subtext of the OP is that you'd totally use lead if it wasn't illegal. Which exactly the same backwards 'hurr durr desk-sitting city environmentalist ruining everything' mentality that nearly every single 'hunter' I know has now.

> There are no biodegradable plastic cups

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodegradable_plastic - Why not?
> Let’s put it another way. What happens if Intel enables AVX2 for AMD and it doesn’t work?

The "safe" thing to do is rather than work through all of these cases you've considered, is to just give up on it.

> No offense but it is hard to respectfully respond to something like this, even though I know it wasn't directed at me personally. I hope you don’t think about coworkers with this mindset.

I didn't intend it to be disrespectful. It's not a value judgement. Maybe these aren't the best terms, but I've worked on both what I would call "low consequence" software, and "high consequence" software. The tolerance for decision making about things like swapping out hardware is different. In some cases, this can be done with little hesitation. In other cases, it would cost millions of dollars to test the system to the point where it could be trusted.

Maybe the solution to the internet pitchfork wielders is for intel to simply stop trying to serve both of these sets of users with the same software. But I suspect they simply don't care about this problem enough to do anything.
> To summarize, what we call “systems programming” I think should be called “low-level programming.” Computer systems design as a field is too important not to have its own name. Clearly separating these two ideas provides a greater conceptual clarity on the space of programming language design, and it also opens the door to sharing insights across the two spaces: how can we design the system around the machine, and vice versa?

Alternate definition whose source I can't recall:

Systems programming is everything that isn't application programming.

Maybe it's time to update that with:

Systems programming is everything that isn't application programming or low-level programming.
The parent said “container ships are only 13% of global merchant shipping capacity”. I’m wondering how else goods are being transported...
loh, Can you list all 'forward thinking' companies that you have dealt in the past? I'm sure there will also be other people interested.
There is a huge problem with the "optimal stopping strategy" presented in the YouTube video: "sample the first 37% of the options, and then choose the first subsequent option that is better than the best option found in the sample."

By definition, there is a 37% chance of the best option being in your initial sample. You would then futilely browse through all the other options, without ever picking anything.

Ie, if you applied this strategy to "finding the love of your life", as the video suggests, there is a 37% chance of you dying completely alone. That doesn't seem like a very optimal strategy to me.
> There are languages that are clearly better suited for systems programming. You might call these "systems programming languages." Would you write a file system driver in PHP?

I wouldnt but that sounds like something we would all read about on HN.
OpenBLAS still didn't have adequate avx512 performance the last time I tried it (a few months ago).

I think BLIS is the best library for performance portability.

MKL offers a lot more than just BLAS and LAPACK. Would be cool for a project like BLIS to expand its scope.
Leetcode premium doesn't mean you'll see the problem. I suspect the probability of that is low, given these problems are constantly changing (there's a banned problem list at Google) and the interviewer pool is as well.
> I see no reason to stall drugs that are proven safe, even if they might not be effective for all patients, as long as there is full disclosure and informed consent. Freedom to choose is a good thing.

I do.

For every treatment you are taking, you could have been taking some other treatment that might be more effective.

If we have no idea whether or not a drug is more effective than placebo, we should not be administering it.
Indeed, bulk carriers and tankers are ships that aren't container ships.
Openstack was written in python...

Personally I use go for everything.
It matches up with the experience of anyone who has ever taken these drugs.

These drugs, taken with a good group of people, always lead to a therapy-like experience. And as GP comment said, they give you the ability to clearly identify what bothers you in life and what to do about it. The only difference between 'medical' sessions and 'recreational' ones is that you're talking to a therapist instead of friends. Having done both, friends are generally the better option.

Actually acting on that information to improve your life is a completely different task, and without taking that step, these drugs do nothing for mental health long term.

There is no difference between 'medicine' and 'drug' other than some regulatory body slapping a label on it. Especially the case with psychedelics where early pioneers performed and documented way more experimentation than FDA-approved research could ever hope to cover.
We've been hearing for years about accelerated drug candidate discovery through better tech and automation, and anecdotally a boom in clinical trials informatics etc, so not surprising
At very least, because they're legally obliged to.
The anti monopoly laws prohibit companies in Intel's position from doing what they're doing (and they also agreed not to in the settlement for the AMD lawsuit).
Actual questions in phonescreen i got were these

https://leetcode.com/problems/powx-n/

https://leetcode.com/problems/product-of-array-except-self/
I'm becoming a broken record on HN about this, but the evidence is in and you can't divorce critical thinking from domain-specific knowledge.

> The ability to question narratives put forth by the industry, the government, media, political parties

You just can't do this properly without a shitload of core domain knowledge in philosophy, politics, media, history and also whatever specific domain knowledge pertinent.

You can't "question narratives" you see in the newspaper if you don't have a good theory of media like what's provided in Manufacturing Consent and even with that you can't "question [the] narrative" of some specific economics thought-piece in the Financial Times if you don't have the relevant domain knowledge in economics.

If you think of the people you'd regard as excellent critical thinkers, wouldn't these all be people with deep knowledge of their domain(s)? Chomsky was never formally schooled in "critical thinking". He just went through normal, rigorous education, reading stacks of books and newspapers along the way.

source: Why Knowledge Matters, by E.D Hirsch
True but I reckon it will be the main cause of the surge described in the article, the current tax rules happen to be very favourable for the Tesla model 3, which will be changed at the start of next year.
Any given document, or event in reality, can be read (interpreted) from a wide variety of perspectives, often with completely contradictory conclusions.

Individuals reading this article from a purely logical, scientific materialist perspective, may form drastically different conclusions than those reading from the wide variety of different possible perspectives. And that's fine, it is the nature of humanity. But it seems very plausible to me that an inability (or unwillingness) of people to interpret ideas from multiple perspectives, is not fine.

There are many problems in the world (yes, I know, this has always been the case...from a binary perspective, but that is only one perspective on it). The world is complex, and getting more complex. Perhaps the manner in which we currently evaluate the world lacks the dimensional complexity required to manage it in a reasonably optimum way?

If(!) this was the case, what might that look like? What would discussions about reality look like? Is it possible that we might be in a situation similar to this? How might we know?
Edison > Tesla!
Most places average over at least 3 years.

If you do a shorter period it's not uncommon for folks to pension spike. Do cash-outs / do bonuses for each other or temporary / activing director of positions that are empty but very high paying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pension_spiking

The french system may prohibit these kind of raises and promotions in the last year of employment.
Well, the crazy thing is, the underlying technology that ML was originally based on (i.e. U. Of Wahington's HIT lab VRD), is absolutely a leading approach in the path to AR. I personally think it's what will ultimately make AR the medium for applications people actually want (dare I say, need) to use every day. Ronny got that part right. Where he failed was in not investing that $2B+ fully into the glasses development and solving hard AR software problems like real time occlusion. Instead, this guy hired "story tellers" to design content for a technology that he didn't have yet.

For the second mistake, let me say only that people in AR marketing demos should not be smiling. If they are, you're introducing the wrong product.

The core idea was on the right track, but the conductor let the train derail very early on.
This is excellent advice! On top of this, you seem to have a great attitude - humility and objectivity. It will help you learn faster!
>>> As haxta4ok00 suggested, one step was to bind authentication cookies to the IP address of the user it was issued to.

Do NOT bind session cookies to an IP. It breaks usability on mobiles, they change networks quite often.

What you can try to do instead is to associate the cookie to the country is user currently is in. It's available in the CF-IPCountry header if you use CloudFlare. This may also cause usability issues for frequent travelers or border workers.

https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/200168236-C...
Even when I was grown up I was again ripped out of yet another fantasy of nature, I guess it is my nature documentary fantasy -- about how they choke their prey to death. Apparently instead, usually they do not choke it to dearh if they even choke at all and just start eating; and they usually start by ripping holes open at the genitals, anus and belly while the prey is still alive.
I haven't seen the video but if they are talking about the secretary problem the caveat is that you can't go back to the previous options. You can do that when trying to a find a partner... sometimes.
An unexpected gift
Compared to PCs of the same era they were very underpowered. And that only got worse as the generation went on. The PS3 and 360 only had 512mb of ram shared between the cpu and gpu which was a pretty serious handicap.

(The lack of ram was definitely the biggest issue, and the thing that held back PC games the most as levels had to be made a lot smaller than they could have been otherwise - Destiny and Final Fantasy XIV are two concrete examples, both released expansions with much larger playable areas as soon as PS3/360 support was dropped).

Compared to other consoles of the same generation they were on par though.
I know. I'm fortunate to have one. Like I said, I completely realize that it isn't usual for people to have portfolios; especially ones with the scope of mine.

I just feel that it's rather self-destructive to ignore those rare instances where they exist.
Ketamine is probably the one drug where the environment doesn’t make a lick of difference because once you drop into the hole, you are on another planet. The outside world may as well not exist.
> Ie, if you applied this strategy to "finding the love of your life", as the video suggests, there is a 37% chance of you dying completely alone. That doesn't seem like a very optimal strategy to me.

I don't think that's correct. You'd set a period of time such as 1 year or 3 years or 5 years or something during which time you will go on n amount of dates total, out of which you reject the first 37%. Then you use that as a basis for the remaining time of that period of time. If you haven't found anyone better by the last date of that time, and you have chemistry with them, you choose that last person to be the love of your life.

And if you don't have chemistry with the last person or you end up breaking up with that person, then you go on dates until you find the next person you have chemistry with and you choose them to be the love of your life.

So it's not like dying completely alone is a probable outcome that would result from the optimal stopping strategy itself.
Its not a zombie, its dead. Foss is bs. Anything worth anything is not givenaway
1st for loop with first word with charecter counts map and second for loop subtracting counts from frist map. See whats remaining in the end, either a map with 1 char left or 1 char left in second. so O(m + n).

abc , adc

a - 1

b - 1

c - 1

after second word loop

b - 1, d
> Objective analysis and the ability to question assumptions, groupthink, consensus offends people.

I disagree. Assumptions, groupthink and consensus are more a consequence of a social hierarchy. Social offense is the feeling one experiences when that hierarchy is challenged. It's a feeling that probably evolved with our pack animal ancestors.

And while social offense is something your brain invents like any other feeling, it's not something you can simply ignore; analogously, the feeling of cold is in your head, but ignoring it can lead to hypothermia. We're still social creatures, our careers and relationships are directly linked to our reputations. We can't simply ignore someone (potentially) assaulting our reputation because it has real world impacts.

To make critical thinking work requires social mechanisms that protect the reputation of the person who is found to be wrong. That's a large part of the reason for the scientific method, for the scholarly tone in academic journals, for professionalism in business, etc.
(Until someone has a more detailed answer)
Both Intel and AMD are on the same X86 architecture, and sse2 etc are just extensions of the X86 architecture, u can check which feature flags a CPU has

And the call/use of these features is the same for AMD or Intel
I think there are some good insights to be gleaned from this essay, as with a lot of pg's essays. The perspective of the guy who founded and ran Y Combinator is always an interesting one to hear from.

However for this essay in particular, had I been among the set of draft readers, I would have suggested toning down the “I hadn't realized X until now, so now I think other people haven't realized X either” message.

Back in college I remember noticing choices of “better learning vs better grade” and deliberately choosing the former with a proudly “screw the authorities” attitude. I'm sure plenty of other Tara Ploughmans could say the same.
I don’t agree with this. Because of the education I received at K-12 and undergrad studies, I was able to get a job. Without that I would not have been able to support my family. Also the K-12 educational systems across the world have lifted several billions out of poverty. Without educational system most people would be mired in ignorance and believing in myths.
There is a big scandal right now in Pakistan where vaccine was improperly stored and given to kids causing VDP and the guy in charge of eradication tried to cover it up and was forced to resign.
I am a “product minded” developer and feel absolutely murdered after a couple years at a large European tech co. The product, and teams, and goals, and people, and managers and everything at all keeps changing over and over and I never really see my efforts amounting to much. New people assigned to projects come with their own agendas and all that you worked for is now forgotten. The relationships you built don’t matter anymore.

At this point I think life would have been a lot easier if I did not care about product - and now I realize many have figured this out sooner than I.
We have instant payments under about $1000 in Australia, and next business day for anything over. RTGS (real-time over $1K) is available for an extra fee of about $2.50.
I once took a call in our office, looking for a "mrs x y". I said sorry noone of that name here. The others come back from lunch, turns out "x y" is a legal alias of colleague "v w", and it was the bank calling.
Energy from where?
Mmmhh, I have doubts about this - e.g. that their business that sells compilers isn't as important as the one that sells CPUs. There would be of course an indirect long-term effect etc... .
What Is a Software as a Service? (SaaS)
It's paywalled. Buried like a Viking ship.
The rest of the article suggest White Shakes will leave the area once Killer Whales appears.

Isn't that the normal scenario of an apex predators appearance? Which is why I am asking, or is this a false assumption?