skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>It seems strange that the author has not met a single one that understands that concept since it is quite basic.

That's exactly what everyone says when candidates fail FizzBuzz.

The best explanation I know is that good candidates get hired quickly, so at any given moment, the candidate pool is dominated by people who keep failing questions like this.
This is why we need regulation and can’t leave this kind of stuff up to the market.

If it costs too much to make a machine that is trained on not
just a set of white faces so it is not discriminatory, that machine should not be allowed to exist. The only alternative is that if you happen to be part of the privileged majority, you can get a cheap picture from an automated booth, whereas everyone else will have no choice but to pay for a more expensive alternative. This will work to amplify any differences that are already ingrained in society (that probably led to the homogenous training set to begin with).
Managed to miss this first time, this is cool.

Also Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
It's a bit sad how the rest of the world don't put such reward for dev jobs.Even here, in London,I'd need to be a quant to pull such a salary.
You can also do a Roth IRA which allows you to pay tax on it now.
> but compiles to standalone binaries that run really, really fast.

In a world with Go, Rust, D, C++ and C, this part requires comparison with these other languages.

Faster than Ruby and faster than Python doesn't cut it.
Funny you should mention that, because fusion plants are pretty much inherently safe from that point of view. From wiki:

>Runaway reactions cannot occur in a fusion reactor. The plasma is burnt at optimal conditions, and any significant change will simply quench the reactions. The reaction process is so delicate that this level of safety is inherent.
Here is the bookmarklet I use for dickbar removal, it works a lot of the time. Use at your own risk; urldecode and read thoroughly before use:

https://pastebin.com/raw/41WxsFY3
Just to be clear, you are willing to say on the record that the Obama campaign and Manaford, a convicted criminal who is known to have worked for a mass murdering autocratic regime as their expert electoral fixer, are “essentially the same” in their use of the Internet?

If so, you’ll have to find someone else to engage in debate with you. If you are capable of believing such a thing, we simply don’t have enough moral common ground to have a productive conversation.

I will say for the benefit of others who might read this, that how successful Cambridge Analytica actually was in manipulating US voters in 2016 is irrelevant to whether or not A) mass disinformation is a real threat to elections everywhere (it is) and B) the Trump campaign employed Cambridge Analytica to manipulate US voters using mass disinformation (they did).
“If not me, then who?” ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
MBA culture introduced us to the meme of "management is a generic function" meaning accountants with an MBA degree could manage engineers, software developers, doctors or teachers using the same tools (e.g. performance metrics).
Alternate take: The open source contributions for this kind of software are contributed to by the same large organizations that purchase this software. You and I (sorry if you are an ERP,etc. developer) probably aren't contributing to these codebases.

One can then imagine that the competitive edge of this new software is subsidized by their customers' developers who contribute the modules needed to cover corner cases (like addresses in Japan, those are hard!).

I agree with your point in general (Gitlab, for example), but this kind of software lives in an enterprise bubble which in my experience has much less 'true' open source behaviors anyway. If this model works for anyone, it's enterprise.
Or they might just pretend, shuffle the waste out through tunnels; they already have a LOT of tunnels.
No, that's not the goal. How do I know? I used to work in the libertarian movement and know a lot of the people involved. I have a number of mutual friends with the Kochs. The people involved in this (even at the top levels) really do believe in criminal justice reform.
I wonder if they can put the NG engines on them and use them that way, or is the airframe itself different enough to not make that possible.
I live in Belgium, which is Odoo home country, and I see many cars bearing Odoo logo in the streets. Also, SMEs here choose Odoo over competition as often as they choose Windows over competition.

ERP vendor roundups, Magic Quadrant and McKinsey advisories exist in a totally different world.
Dunno about the government, but ARM and Rolls Royce have certainly done very well in their given fields.
Curiously they are parts suppliers, not whole product manufacturers.
I hate to maybe be proving his point by showing that I'm not into the EE field and thinking of a board mounted DCDC-converter as a voltage regulator (which it is but not what you usually call it in english?)

I would still argue that logic IC have alot of internal pull ups. Or that eg. "Reset sequence of digital component is wrong" is a bad whiteboard question.
How does this compare with launchy? https://www.launchy.net/
It does bother me that a money-prioritised private entity currently controls so much of society and in such a deep way. If Fb doesn't agree with your culture, your minority group, or your opinions, you are arguably, in effect, censored from 'society'. They need to be regulated by more democratic and neutral entities, i.e. governments.

Democratic governments are not allowed to shut down free speech which directly criticises them. Facebook now has more power - in effect - than most democratic governments.
"Universities these days do not seem to successfully evaluate deep understanding" If you (as Uni) try and do that, you'd immediately find your quota of those who have finished a degree to plummet.

At our university we had basically only TWO courses that required you to "understand" to pass them and not just mindlessly puke out formulas and insert values. These were theoretical electrodynamics and integrated analog circuits. These were exactly the exams that kicked people out of university, since you had only 3 attempts to pass them.

So, no, uni's will never try to force understanding, since so few are actually capable of that. Unis teach you to know the basic set of symbols, be a mindless symbol manipulating monkey and hope that industry would pick you up and enlighten you afterwards.
Even if you recertify it, it's still a shitty design. If you're gonna do a new type certification it may as well be a new better design, without the decades-long 737 legacy baggage.
It tells a lot about their passion.
> If you're in the engineering, product, design, marketing, sort of the builder's side of that organization, you've got to know that you're creating a lot more value than that, possibly 10 times, maybe 100 times that value

Very dubious. From personal experience I'd guess that most non-sales employees at the big tech companies are actually creating negative value for the business (not contributing enough to profit to pay their comp and benefits). This mainly seems to happen for two reasons:

1. Career incentives for decision-makers (Eng. and PM management and directors) are almost totally disconnected from the profitability of the business. You can definitely become a superstar by building something wildly profitable, but that's the hard approach. The easier and more common approach is simple empire-building: Gather a larger and larger team, and have more projects and launches under you. The projects don't necessarily even need to intend to make or save money - you get to pick the metrics you target, and you can probably find some that indicate you're successful! The overall impact is mis-allocation of talent on a pretty grand scale.

2. On a more micro-scale (within teams), engineers are terrible at focusing on things that are good for the business. If you leave an engineering team alone, they will spend 90% of the time rewriting systems that already exist to make them simpler, easier to modify, etc. They will normally accomplish this! But the rewritten systems will do almost nothing to increase how much money the company makes, and it's rare that it will save enough resources to be worth it (engineers are expensive).

Both big tech companies I've worked at had what seemed like a relatively small set of teams focused on the core of the business, who were laser-focused on improving revenue or reducing the cost of core infrastructure used around the business. There were a much larger set of teams working on projects with less clear business value.
That’s much worse. The number of people out there who will do this deliberately is much smaller than the number of people who will do it accidentally, but the harms are the same. We need to avoid carelessly applying technology to areas where carelessness can harm people severely.
It has always bugged me that

git commit --amend

Doesn't automatically resign (or fail to resign if the key isn't available) a signed git commit message. Anytime there is a non-verified git commit message in my history you can be sure it's because I was a dummy on the original message.
Frankly you heard wrong. There isn't anything like this.
I’m 6’4. I’ve flown journeys of adding up to 24 hours in 30 hours before. Never had a problem.
Passport photos have been issued for over a century without needing this crap. Yes, it meant more rejections, and it meant inspectors allowing photos that had minor rule violations, but convenience isn’t the paramount goal of everything.
I've explained this several times that facts and the narrative based on them are entirely different. The former is settled, otherwise it wouldn't be a fact. The latter is not, and is what the discussion is for.

> "science has conclusively shown something that TGD safe-space people don't want to hear"

This plays out in every single HN thread when controversial subjects come up. We just had one a few days ago about male and female brains.

> "I think it's likely that it's you that misunderstands what science is and how it works, not me."

That's interesting because I've said that understanding science is a prerequisite to understanding the consensus of objective truths while explaining how those truths are derived from the scientific method and proofs, yet you argue that it's irrelevant in your prior comments since it can all be questioned endlessly.

So which is it? Either you understand it and there are objective truths or you question it all. Claiming that someone else doesn't understand it is doing exactly what you say can't be done as an argument.

Or, perhaps, I do know what science is and how it works, and having a consistent argument shows the power of using science in discussions where both parties agree on the same principles of reality? Anyways, this seems to have run its course so I'll end it there.
I combed through the article and a previous article linked in it, but I can't find any concrete answer one way or the other. My intuition is that it would have to be recalculating it's inputs as the environmental variables change. They could have modeled in expected tire friction coefficient changes, or perhaps the task is more forgiving of that changing variable than I expected.

One of their stated goals is to drift in tandem with another human driven vehicle though, so they are likely aiming for complete, adaptable autonomy.
> The difference is that now Google and FB pay way more. More than startups could ever dream of competing with.

Logically speaking, the only way that a company can pay more and still be profitable is if they produce value more efficiently. On a general, macro level.

So, if startup founders cannot even dream of providing either cash or equity (adjusted to risk) comparable to the big-techs, does this mean that startups are no longer the best way for society to become more productive?

I only see if two ways (again at the macro level)

a) Startups are better than BigTech for society economically: so make sure you hire the best-of-the-best, and give them high equity, and later compensation when you have more cash.

b) BigTech is better than startups for society economically: here, the proof is in the pudding, better hires leads to more profits, so hire the best of the best, and just give them mountains of cash.

I feel like we're seeing b) for the last 5 - 6 years.
Why is a circle in a plane surrounded by 6 other circles?
This reminds me vaguely of the community science project I contributed to a few years ago trying to investigate why epsilon Aurigae [0] goes dim every ~27 years. It turns out to be a likely dust disk of an orbiting body that dims the main star and happens to be directly along the line of sight with Earth.

I imagine there are a lot of possible ways a line of site occlusion could cause a dim star to appear as not existing at all, and as another commenter mentions, maybe the original measurement was some sort of amplification in the first place.

Space is damn cool.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_Aurigae
I often encourage founders to be more generous with equity for recruits and early employee refresh grants. Care and feeding of the org also involves being thankful to the people who build the value.
More “troubling” internal Boeing documents on 737 Max set for release
Really getting into the nitty-gritty here. If an entity migrates to an inactive chunk, I keep the entity "on hold" and add a "chunk set mutation" to the active chunk set so that the set is expanded in the next tick. The processing thread for this newly added chunk sees that no data exists yet and synchronizes the state from the backend during the subsequent tick. On this tick the entity gets added to the new chunk write state and disappears quietly from the old chunk in the next tick since it isn't "on hold" or copied anymore.

As for the processing per tick: the entire active chunk set gets semi-randomly processed by threads. You'd be absolutely right that the order of operations isn't always deterministic. An entity not being processed for a tick doesn't happen since the old chunk will still process entities that are "on hold", but only perform a subset of operations. Double-processing does occur and this is sometimes visible while playing with a chat message being duplicated. This happens pretty rarely and I took care to make sure occasional double-processing doesn't interfere with gameplay mechanics.

As for synchronization: yes, each tick all processing threads join together and the server performs minor central processing and scheduling. Then the next tick begins and all threads are started again.
Sub-FANNG SWEs? 250k+ or gtfo? I sincerely hope Google and it’s Ilk don’t represent the best of the best because that would mean the best of our indistry would be found severely wanting.
The Order of the Dolphin: SETI's Origin Story
Tangentially related anecdote:

As an undergrad, I got to spend a semester in the ROTC capstone for second semester seniors called “Leadership and Ethics.” I remember walking in on my first day in cargo shorts and flip flops as the only civilian and non-senior student. Everyone else was in full uniform. The class was taught by a Marine Officer.

As a business student, I realized how similar the military and business can be. Most of the theory of leadership and management aims to address a fundamental goal: how do you get people to do something they may not necessarily want to do. Whether that’s making widgets or killing someone, the underlying theories are quite similar.

The main difference I noticed between the two fields was the military’s emphasis on trust. You were to respect a chain of command because you could trust your commanding officer. You were expected to perform your best because you could trust your teammates to do the same. The reason soldiers could rely on this trust was because their superiors had gone through the bullshit and could manage from a seat of positional and experiential authority.

In the business world, they taught management as if having positional authority would automatically create trust and inspire subordinates. MBA students graduate and come into supervisory roles without any prior experience in the underlying work and get mixed results. Part of me wonders whether this is due to ineptitude or simply inexperience.

I remember finishing that course and thinking I really should study engineering because I knew that wanted to play a role in managing and leading technical teams working on innovative problems.

Fast forward a few years and I left my role in public accounting to go into industry, but instead of going into finance or internal accounting I chose to learn development and spend a few years experiencing what it’s like to be a developer, so that one day when I’m managing a technical team I can actually know when they’re giving me a legitimate justification for something, and when they’re just bullshitting me.

Having been a developer for a couple years now, I don’t know how I could have managed a technical team without this experience. I think back to my “career plan” before I took that class and remember thinking that I’d not only be able to find a managerial position upon graduation, but that I’d be able to lead effectively as a 22 year old. What a foolish 20 year old I was!

Anyway, this is really just a roundabout way of saying I loved my class and have tremendous respect for military leadership. I would have loved to have more classes with officers and veterans, and hope my kids get that opportunity someday.
Ok, but please don't respond to one indignant comment with another. We're trying to avoid that here, and a thread about Ram Dass is a great place to work on it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I never thought I would learn so much about Tin
The closest standard value for that resistor would be a 3k3, if I'm not mistaken...

In the software industry we have a similar problem; alot of people can follow instructions on how to glue together lots of libraries and frameworks, but have no idea how to go beyond that --- or understanding of how computers work in general --- much less debug it when something goes wrong. There's a classic article about this:

https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/
Just based on your rebuttal, background knowledge and common sense alone, please write up an article, even if you only flesh out the points you made. I agree with as much as I can relate to, but the rest begs for more story!
It's missing git revert merges

git revert -m 1 88113a64a21bf8a51409ee2a1321442fd08db705
Googler here. I'm not sure when you interviewed or your friends worked at Google, but nowadays managers undergo some training (I can't tell you how thorough that is, because I didn't do it yet).

Also, right now, I believe the norm is to have managers and TLs as separate positions, even in small teams (like mine, 5 people in total).
Its a funny word and it makes me have nice feelings when i think of it working out.
For anyone else using NixOS, https://github.com/nixos-rocm/nixos-rocm by Anthony Cowley works very well.

While ROCm works well, I think it is yet another example of what AMD gets wrong software-wise. I like to think I'm fairly familiar with GPGPU, in that I have used OpenCL and CUDA for years, and even wrote my own optimising compiler that generates GPU code. I even use ROCm every day on my home system. Yet, I would be hard pressed to succinctly state what ROCm is. The GitHub page states the following:

> ROCm is designed to be a universal platform for gpu-accelerated computing. This modular design allows hardware vendors to build drivers that support the ROCm framework. ROCm is also designed to integrate multiple programming languages and makes it easy to add support for other languages.

Okay? It then lists some other stuff:

> • Drivers
> • Tools
> • Libraries
> • Source Code

The AMD GPU kernel driver, amdgpu, is upstreamed in Linux, so what exactly does ROCm contain? The OpenCL ICD? (I'm pretty sure it does.) As far as I can see, I don't have any ROCm-specific kernel drivers loaded, but OpenCL on my AMD GPU works fine.

The tools are also confusing. There's an "HCC compiler", but are we even still supposed to use HCC? As I recall, it was/is some heterogeneous compute C++ dialect. There's also HIP, which converts CUDA to something that can run on AMD GPUs. Trying to refresh my memory, I actually can't figure out in two minutes what language the output is. HCC? OpenCL?

Among the other tools, there is inconsistency between ROCM and ROCm (pedantry, I know, I assume it's the same), but there is also the "ROC Profiler" and "ROCr Debug Agent". Are "ROC" and "ROCr" significant terms? And when should I use the "Radeon Compute Profiler" (rocm-profiler) and when should I use the "ROC Profiler" (rocprofiler-dev)?

I do so dearly want to support AMD. Their hardware is good and their fully open source drivers are a wonderful accomplishment. Seriously, I want to underline just how amazed I am that I have a fully free high-performance GPGPU stack running. However, if you compare AMDs software efforts to NVIDIA, it is clear that NVIDIA deserves their success. It's not just about breadth (NVIDIA is bigger, I can understand they have more resources), but the fact that AMD seems to spread itself too thin over too many effort, and it makes everything feel kind of shoddy and poorly documented.
Interesting! Maybe so. I exited around 2012 with a tidy sum
Now I personally can't stand to work for big companies, but it's definitely not because its a bad financial move. Might as well write a post about "downsides of not picking the right lottery numbers". I know more people who have retired young and comfortably from a career at Microsoft (or Google, or Amazon) than I do who have achieved wealth from startups (and I know plenty of both types here in Seattle). In every single case there was substantial risk and a big element of luck for the startups that succeeded, while those who worked for the big firms never once worried that their paycheck might bounce.
I think it's more referring to compensation. If you're only offering half the pay of some of the alternatives, you're simply not going to get a shot at most of the highest-skilled job seekers. They will, sensibly, tend to go work for the highest-paying employers. Free market for labor and all that.
This page is from 2015 yet hasn't once came up on my searches to do a bunch of these things. Thanks for resharing.
rules_python has supported py3 for a while.

The next obvious question is, what would you do to make it simpler? Tons of people have tried (you listed 5), and they all rebuilt the same thing. What features do you drop?
Just saw the comment - I think it's easy to delineate between 3rd party and 1st party cookies, though I know that this would make is much harder to use a lot of SaaS products like Google Analytics etc.

Is it possible for us to create a tech ecosystem where those 3rd party cookies can be avoided in general?
honey, water, legumes, etc. Among diet rule of thumbs, its not a great one.
The Gospel of Wealth According to Marc Benioff
Faraday's Lectures