skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why should mathematicians want non-mathematicians to care? The evidence to date shows that non-mathematicians do things like starting wars, electing Trump, dying of heroin overdoses, circulating conspiracy theories about climate change, sentencing Socrates to death, chopping down the Academy for firewood, putting Archimedes to the sword, burning the books and burying the scholars under Qin Shi Huang, burning Giordano Bruno, killing Galois in a duel, only recognizing Leonardo for his paintings, stripping the German Jewry of their professorships (those they didn't simply murder first, like Gödel's mentor Moritz Schlick), and drugging Turing until he grew breasts and killed himself. The best the mathematicians can hope for is to evade the attentions of the non-mathematicians so they can be left in peace with their theorems and their olive groves. The theorems are true and beautiful whether the non-mathematicians care or not.

Governments burn libraries. Governments manifest the will of the common people.

I, too, believe that academia has lost its way. Over the entry of the Academy it said, "Do not enter, non-geometers." We should return to that policy; allowing theologians and such peddlers of nonsense into the academy was an unavoidable concession during medieval times, but it is one we should walk back.
Your experience sounds to me like modular mapping. I also tend to have abstracted, modular mental maps. They are modular due to gaps in my knowledge or other practical reasons (compression?). I don't think this modularity says anything about ones propensity to plan or navigate in a detached, third-person perspective versus in a first-person perspective. Clearly, with a more abstract mental map, you cannot plan in purely geometric terms. But, that doesn't distinguish whether or not you think about your environment in a holistic, out-of-time, out-of-body perspective.

I am sure this varies by person as well, but I think people in grid-oriented cities or in relatively flat, open terrain are more likely to navigate and plan in a concretely geometric way. You can reason about and infer paths on a 2D plane and benefit from having a good knowledge of relative cartesian positions for different locations. You don't need detailed knowledge of other routing constraints when the paths are more interchangeable.

If limited by transportation modes, you might be biased towards a more hierarchical mental model. I.e. I know some areas abstractly by the highway, exit, and local neighborhood without a clear model for how (if at all) several such areas connect together via local roads. Users of public transit systems are likely to have similarly hierarchical knowledge of trains, buses, and transfer stations. Popular transit system maps are greatly simplified to show this abstract topology without the full spatial complexity of the real physical system.

When faced with challenging topography and circuitous routes, I think a more abstract topological model is more common. I have a rough sense of position along a route in terms of percentage completion or relative ordering of landmarks. This includes some topological knowledge such as trail junctions, water crossings, or ridges and saddles along this same abstract route. I don't retain a detailed memory of every twist or switchback in a convoluted trail. I can plan to walk around a lake or the rim of a valley without detailed memory of the shoreline or cliff edges themselves.

However, I do also have a pretty good sense of my real orientation, i.e. where is north, where is the sun, which way does the surface tilt, and which bearing would take me towards other places I know (if I could fly). I have used that to speculate and plan routes cross country without any visible trail or trail markers. But, I am not foolhardy, so I do consult maps as well!
"Developer" is appropriately diffuse in its meaning. It includes all the steps of making software happen, requirements gathering, critical thinking thereon, etc. "Programmer" can sound like just "guy what taps on the keyboard". It can even be faintly perjorative in some contexts.

I'd use "software engineer" if I could in good conscience, but "software developer" is pretty neutral while still being accurate.
https://outline.com/Xu7nwv
We have to recognize the status quo as an opportunity to revolutionize the software industry.
In the business world, there is no objective measure for the value of all things. I have to pay someone enough they'll do what I need them to do, but not too much that I cannot recoup expenses and keep the business running. What that value is is not exactly defined, b/c the life of the business and the market it depends on is a very dynamic thing.
I tried reading Stapledon's Last and First Men and Starmaker multiple times. Super, super, super boring. Reading about them is much more interesting, though.

He really had a wide-ranging vision that is evocative of the sort of thinking that the Long Now Foundation is interested in today. Pity he was such an abysmally poor writer.
In practice, Costa Rica has a standing military. It's just the US military.

Due to the Monroe Doctrine, this is a rational stance for Costa Rica to take. If the US were to adopt this policy, Costa Rica might have to take a hard look at repealing it.
Any thoughts about how?
A lot of misinformation is pumped out at the cost of those being misinformed for the benefit of those pumping out misinformation.

All of this is well orchestrated by large tech companies in an effort to drive down labor costs. The problem is, there's an assumption that the current labor market is just asking too much.

I think looking at the current labor market landscape, practices in place industry wide (e.g., agile, interview processes, etc.) were starting to see labor market feedback that this simply isn't the case. Development is hard, it's time consuming, expensive, and requires a lot of active practice--no matter how much you want to drive labor costs down.

Ultimately I hope the entire strategy backfires and we turn away talent industry wide to other sectors and then there truly are shortages resulting in businesses pushing these practices unable of maintaining their businesses and forcing them to scale back--wishful thinking though.
Based on what data is that true exactly?

Opinions are fine, I don’t like CoffeeScript and never have.

It’s no justification to shame someone’s choices when perfectly well working code is usable via what appears to me to be a healthily maintained tool. Less popular? Sure. Would I reach for it to start a new project? no.

Calling it dead though and saying it’s only around because it’s “legacy” and only was used by “cool IT juniors” is shaming a legitimate choice without giving any context or data to back up the assertions
Amazing. Slightly related, Internet Historian's video on an Agile Conference.

https://youtu.be/ROaj3bCpZEM
Nice... patiently waits for AWS to create a managed version of it...
hot take: the people crying about this are salty about getting rejected. it's really not hard to pass these interviews.
A Repository of Configurations
> just pass environmental variables between applications

That would require me to 1) somehow ensure that shell is sourcing the the environment variables from a file, and 2) we are back to all the hackery mentioned in the article [1]

[1] https://wiki.bash-hackers.org/howto/conffile
Still thinking about it, still want to, haven't worked on it yet, will at some point.

Edit: if anyone wants to be a story reviewer, find 3 submissions that got posted to HN but didn't get attention, which you think the community might like and which gratify intellectual curiosity (i.e. aren't interesting just for sensational reasons). Oh, and which you're not personally connected to. Then email them to us at hn@ycombinator.com.

For examples, you can see a partial list of stories that were picked in this way here: https://news.ycombinator.com/invited. Those are ones where we invited a repost because the original submission was too old to re-up, but the criteria are the same. We'll publish the full list at some point.
But while they are getting guidance and mentorship, they are not being a productive member of the team, taking time away from experienced developers and as soon as they level up they will change companies and the next company didn’t have to invest training time.

I know everyone has to start somewhere but from the company’s perspective, hiring a junior developer doesn’t make sense.
TimescaleDB co-founder here.

TimescaleDB is a more versatile time-series database. It supports a variety of datatypes (text, ints, floats, arrays, json), allows for out-of-order writes and backfilling of old data, supports full SQL, JOINs between tables (eg for metadata), flexible continuous aggregates, native compression, and is backed by the reliability of Postgres. [0]

M3DB seems much more limited in scope [1]:

"Current Limitations

Due to the nature of the requirements for the project, which are primarily to reduce the cost of ingesting and storing billions of timeseries and providing fast scalable reads, there are a few limitations currently that make M3DB not suitable for use as a general purpose time series database.

The project has aimed to avoid compactions when at all possible, currently the only compactions M3DB performs are in-memory for the mutable compressed time series window (default configured at 2 hours). As such out of order writes are limited to the size of a single compressed time series window. Consequently backfilling large amounts of data is not currently possible.

The project has also optimized the storage and retrieval of float64 values, as such there is no way to use it as a general time series database of arbitrary data structures just yet."

[0] https://www.timescale.com/

[1] https://m3db.github.io/m3/m3db/#current-limitations
There are a number of old-school C programs that follow a familiar template: they're invoked on the command line, run from top to bottom, and exit.

For those, it's often the case that they allocate-only, and have a cleanup block for resources like file handles which must be cleaned up; any error longjmps there, and it runs at the end under normal circumstances.

This is basically using the operating system as the garbage collector, and it works fine.
6 confirmations is a made up metric. One would only need to wait that long if transacting with an untrustworthy counterparty who controlled significant computing power they were willing to direct at Bitcoin hashing.

One or even zero confirmations is acceptable depending on the amount spent.

For something like buying coffee, Lightning Network to transact would be way better.
I was interviewing for a position and when they got to asking me in the initial phone screen various diversity questions I politely told them I didn’t think the company would be for me. I’m all about diversity but if you’re trying to project your “wokeness” in the first conversation I’ll pass thanks.
Honestly, that sounds great to me. I often feel as though a lot of SF forces some sort of human-interest piece into what the author really wants to do, which is world building. Skipping the love story sounds appealing, like skipping the opening vinette that every journalist thinks is necessary before daring to mention a statistic.
The writer does not mention eliminating complex grammar, and uses pronouns a lot. I find using pronouns greatly dilutes meaning and efficiency for non-native English speakers and requires more attentive reading even for native English speakers. The writer is not using simple direct language in my opinion, and being both simple and direct are critical for useful writing.
Yes, HTTP+Json API is not very different from SOAP. But it's not the fault of OpenAPI if everybody does them. At least OpenAPI and OpenAPI-generator fill the gaps that were missing (an IDL and contract based code generation)
Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mechanical Knight and Other Robots (2019)
That’s definitely a downside to an up or out system. In other industries there’s a “mommy track” that allows for stepping back without stepping out but I don’t know of anything like that in tech.
I have a CS degree .. and I find it more difficult to write good requirements and come up with good design (since people are generally changing the requirements and the design should be flexible) prior to programming than to solve some problem on a whiteboard.

I decided to not to do any whiteboard challenges unless the whiteboard has a built in editor, search engine and stack overflow. So far people who interviewed me just wanted to know about the different projects that I worked on during the last 15 years.

I'm lazy and don't have time to prepare for interviews or do home assignments because of family life. I'm going to be frank about this if I'm asked to do anything more than talking during an interview.
they didnt mind the hillary "correct the record" shills
Having a concrete problem or concrete project can help to focus attention. The "DS" of "DSL" is "domain-specific". So, what's your first target domain? Maybe your end goal is building some general machinery that is "domain agnostic" and can implement DSLs etc for multiple domains... but to get started it might be helpful to figure out what a good specific approach is for one particular domain, and then a second, and then a third.
Apple did not buy Rdio, they basically went out of business and sold what they left to Pandora.
The problem is very few people do the same job in software. You're not writing the same code, in the same domain etc. Looking back to jobs I've had in the past, my job was always different even from people on the same team. We specialized in different parts of the code base, or using different technologies or just gravitated towards different focuses. e.g. I was the data guy, we had someone else that was really good at debugging hard problems and someone we'd always consult for API design.
Designing Distributed Systems with TLA+
Weighing your relative percentage ownership of the company against anchoring points and folkloric benchmarks is irrational. You need to evaluate the story that gives your shares value, have some clear idea of the numbers the company has to hit to get there, figure out what you'll make according to that story if things go well, risk-weight that, and see if the offer is competitive. Most employees don't do this, even when they're empowered to do so by management. Shares are undervalued by employees; many more of them should just be paid cash.
Not really. The way that people use this live stream is often via YouTube integration with other services rather than via YouTube directly.
* being graded by a student 2 months ahead

There’s also an instructor in every cohort, so your TA (we call them TLs) is more of a first line of defense. We brought in the strongest design students to be TAs which is why they weren’t very much further in the curriculum - in fact they actually had a different curriculum. An exception to the rule caused by curriculum change.

*being taught by someone under a sheet

We brought in contractors to help teach the new curriculum, and one hadn’t adjusted the light in his room for video conferencing and couldn’t see the screen for sunlight, so... improvised. Normally there are weeks of practice lessons and training, so this also the result of a rush.
If he spends his own money so inefficiently, it really doesn't bode well for how he'd spend other people's money.
I suspect you're thinking about this in generalities, like "everyone is taking some risk so everyone should have comparable risk protections". But preferred shares for investors address a specific kind of risk, involving management's incentives, one not shared with employees.

The rest of the protections VC gets for their shares are simply a result of market power. They have it; employees won't organize and don't.
Double negatives are tricky! Now you seem to be saying they probably are based in fairy tales, or at least have no reason to think otherwise. The first time around, you seemed to mean the opposite, which is what you say you actually meant.
As a non-Ruster, any particular reason they didn't include this? A lot of the code I've done over the years involve graphs, which have a lot of circular pointer and/or backpointers. I find it kinda weird they'd make such a common thing a PITA in a new language.
That's why https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22332201 was such a great comment.
Probably that plays a role. However, not everything is a startup. Accumulating technical debt during even just a few years like there is no tomorrow is also a non negligible risk. You can also go from billion to zero in a few years...
It's a missile.

The memory is going to fragment no matter what you do.
It's not a lot of material, check it out.

Characters add quite a bit to world building though.

"a lot of SF forces some sort of human-interest piece into what the author really wants to do"

I think many authors want the world to serve the perspectives they want to communicate and examine, so if it doesn't work, they just aren't accomplishing that.
There is a shortage where I live. It has been like this for last decade.

Perhaps you should stop flocking to one location in the states and go somewhere else?
Might you be mistaking seniority with 'tenure' or years of experience?

In my company simply staying around long enough doesn't make you a senior. You need to demonstrate that you are working at the next level to get promoted, and the guidelines for each level are well defined.

We also have a development plan program to coach low performers into either improving, or leaving the company, so the chances of someone getting promoted and then doing bad work is diminished.
Yup, a brief glimpse into the far landscape, showing what the mind can do, but you must then work to get there for real
Sure, but “unwritten” requirements pop up all the time for any requirements, so the two situations are still broadly equivalent.
> In 2019, Berkshire sent $3.6 billion to the U.S. Treasury to pay its current income tax. The U.S. government
collected $243 billion from corporate income tax payments during the same period. From these statistics, you can take
pride that your company delivered 11⁄2% of the federal income taxes paid by all of corporate America.
One does not become a billionaire if one believes "I have plenty of money already" is a good reason to stop accumulating wealth.
I am curious to know how each application is isolated, and how a shared database would work in this type of infrastructure.
Define "legitimate." There are plenty of competitors which could host the channel mentioned in TFA, and many Youtubers also post videos on other social media sites, Twitch, etc.
Bitwig was created by Ableton employees.
Turn left where the old Johnson house used to be, then keep going until 2 miles before the gas station, then turn right.
Some Chevy Chase movie=funny farm?
> There were quite a few admissions by hiring managers at surprisingly well known companies that the ability to pass algorithm challenges does not correlate with success on the job.

There are a lot of anecdotes like that, but the statistics I've seen has clear correlation between performance on algorithm interviews and performance on the job. I don't think there are any public studies done on this though so if you don't work at a company where you can view it internally you just have to trust that someone has gone through the numbers at these big data-driven companies.
I use C. And you are right, in my field there is a tendency to a large degree to re-invent the wheel of data-structures :-). Sometimes justified, but most times not. But mostly because C doesn't usually have well-known, industry-standard libraries for common data-structures. Or even if they do, it's kind of trivial to implement basic data-structures (not saying they will be bug-free!) instead of relying on some random distribution of a library from the Internet.

BTW, most times, the problem is not performance, but tight control of memory usage.
Shameless self-promotion: I launched hirecontributors[1] yesterday, which lets you search for people who contributed to several of the open source projects you use.

Shameless nonself-promotion: The Discord "Credentials + Meritocracy"[2]

[1] https://hirecontributors.com

[2] https://discordapp.com/invite/s7bGAQM
There is no other sane and effective way to filter the insane amount of FAANG applicants, only DS&A.

Other non FAANG/Unicorns that don’t pay as well as FAANG can drop the practice of asking DS&A questions. But for those companies that pay really really well, there will be insane amount of people that are willing to get a job there, and DS&A is a “May the strongest win” filter (although luck play a very strong role as well, yes there are stories where a junior job applicant get 4 Hard Leetcode out of 5 questions). I happily oblige. I happily will get through 1000 Leetcode and roll the dice (apply multiple times) if I need to in order to get that salary. No I’m not willing to get lower salary than FAANG/Unicorns, that’s why I’m doing this.

For companies that don’t pay as well as FAANG, just drop your DS&A interview practice, or just lower the bar, otherwise it is a waste of time for either the companies or the applicants.

EDIT:

TL/DR. The whole answer to this DS&A debacle is only 1 thing: SALARY. End. Period. No other factor matters.

You lower the salary, no one will bother with DS&A. You increase the salary, every single person on earth and their dog will study DS&A 24/7 to get that FAANG salary. Don't believe me? Head to Leetcode forum and reddit cscareerquestions. Actually we don't even need to go that far, just look at this topic on HN every single time. It is all about SALARY. Full stop.
I suggest approaching those books the way one should approach the Silmarillion.

Pretend you're reading a history book. There's a lot of detail, many stories, which don't have to follow the novelist's imperative to make sense and have narrative resolution.

It's still quite possible you won't enjoy yourself, there are no guarantees in life. But this approach gives you your best chance.
Full disclosure: I work for Google and like it

I left Google in 2009, quite unhappy about the difference between a startup and corporate politics. After that I worked at 3 startups (5 years), 1 telco (1 year) and at McKinsey (3 years).

I ended up interviewing at Google again in 2018, after deciding that a) I liked programming more than management consulting and b) my comparative advantage was in programming. I definitely could have felt entitled after 1) passing Google interviews once before, 2) having had three somewhat successful startups and 3) proving I can also handle the corporate side.

I was asked multiple questions that could be interpreted as 'algorithmic' (and I have to admit that after 3 years of not coding I was nervous about them). However, they can also be interpreted differently, more charitably. They all followed the structure of: 1) give a reasonable but not completely defined problem - you should be able to clarify enough of this to show you can deal with some ambiguity; 2) turn that into an algorithm - you should be able to articulate an easy algorithm and be able to discuss improvements to it; 3) turn your algorithm into code - you need to show you can actually program. I definitely didn't have to memorize and regurgitate textbook solutions.

I acknowledge that a) the above may optimize for rejecting all negatives at the cost of some false positives and b) it's still a very basic lower bar and doesn't predict who will perform highly vs. ok. However, I did think it tested for the core skills I expect from programmers.

I've also set up interviewing processes at startups. I did end up emphasizing ownership and 'getting things done' more than Google does. I do think startups should test for different attributes than 100k+ FTE corporations.
https://archive.md/ZfcTU
Haha yes, at that point, nailing the interview will just come down to how well you are able to gauge what the person at the other side of the table wants to hear. "Hmm, is this a tabs or a spaces guy?"