skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the private sector, your salary comes from revenue, and your ability to negotiate your salary, that is, your leverage, comes from the impact you can have on that revenue.

In government, your salary comes from taxes, or absent sufficient tax revenue, from inflation (i.e. the government just prints more money).
How to Set Environment Variable in Bash
Tell People About Your Business and Services
“The Mirror & the Light”– first chapter of final volume of Hilary Mantel trilogy
How large is your deck? I'm at 14k (which is considered a reasonable size). I definitely do average about 30 minutes + a day, but the productivity at work has helped me much more.

I've thought about this quite a bit and written about strategies and tips here: https://senrigan.io/blog/everything-i-know-strategies-tips-a...

A large part is also now using the proper visualization techniques (ie. using intensive memories, an anecdotal use case is I've memorized certain ideas behind neural networks by always putting them in a "closet"). This helps. Truncation of dumb cards is useful.

Another really important thing is just to delete an entire deck (which I've done), when I realized I frankly ... just don't care about the subject any more (in this case, music composition).
Perhaps that is the core problem, but that problem is caused by not knowing the requirements to begin with. Which again is usually caused by not knowing what your customer wants (which you should be able to do, even if they don’t know themselves what they want), or not knowing who your customers are. Contract work is the best environment for fostering a culture of not knowing what your customers want, because it is the ultimate exercise in fence-throwing (often to somebody who’s just going to throw it over yet another fence).

Problems tend not to change so dramatically over the course of a project. What usually happens is some stakeholder realizes at some point that they didn’t actually understand the problem the first time around, and thus need to change the requirements. Even significant regulatory changes won’t usually cause that. In almost all cases, regulatory changes have a significant amount of time between announcement and enforcement.

Making your development practices more responsive to change is a good goal, but it doesn’t solve this problem. Because this problem is typically created before the first line of code is written. If the defined requirements don’t actually solve the customers problem, then they’re going to be delivered a non-functional solution, whether it takes one year to deliver, or one day.
> dynamic demand

Which does not actually mean turning off the power grid for hours as a lot of people here claim but things like throttling down energy-intensive industry at peak times and running non-time-critical jobs when there's surplus energy.
The question is whether it is overall good system to punish people for staying asuming same quality of work.
What I wonder is whether the Chez base might massively improve Racket's concurrency capabilities.

In Common Lisp, one has pthreads-like concurrency capabilities which seem very well suited for fine-grained parallelism as well as for server tasks. I am thinking in such things like parallel backtracking and optimization algorithms for robotic control or board games, for example.

However, threads are notoriously difficult to handle cleanly and safely in larger programs. Here, Clojure (which in my eyes is a very Scheme-like Lisp) offers a very elegant solution with its concurrency primitives of Futures, Atoms, Agents, and STM. After some experimenting, I believe they are very, very attractive for many concurrent server tasks (like a web server), but not that well suited for computing-intensive parallel algorithms like the ones I mentioned above, which I am highly interested in. Part of the reasons are that such algorithms can become quite GC-heavy. Also, the Clojure compiler has limits on how much primitive types can be passed as parameters in one functions. This means that a complex backtracking algorithm in Clojure can still be two orders of magnitude slower than in C (which is somewhat disappointing, but one has to remember that Clojure was not designed for this).

Racket has had, so far, only limited concurrency capabilities. It had Futures, however they could easily become blocked by GC. It also has Places, which are a very safe and clean solution of splitting parallel computations into separate processes. However, I think that places are not the first choice for heavily parallel algorithms with strong interdependencies.

Now, Racket can run on top of Chez, and Chez has fine-grained concurrency capabilities on top of pthreads, which seem to be on par with Common Lisp. Also, Racket has strong support for functional and side-effect free programming, including some data structures. In my impression, this seems to open a wide range of new possibilities, including providing look-alike primitives for Clojure's Futures, Agents, and Atoms. I would be very interested to know more whether this impression is correct.
Booking.com - sold in 2005. TomTom - dying since smartphones. Philips - an old appliance company. Ayden - hadn't heard of it, but granted.

I hear of new companies from China all the time.
Each software development methodology seems to be about mitigating particular risks.

Agile seems to be mitigating the customer not knowing what they want the software to do; tiny little software cycles, little steps, making the customer look at it frequently and saying what they think.

There are software projects with high-quality customers (sadly so rare) for which that risk is much lower, and as such agile is a bad fit. There are certainly software projects where waterfall is a better fit, mitigating against different risks.
Thanks for the feedback. I found out that this is because wkhtmltopdf renders the page without waiting for the fonts to finish loading. Increasing rendering latency is a solution, and I'm looking for a better solution.
From the article: "a business that offers feminist-minded co-working spaces".

How should I imagine a feminist minded co-working space?
I’ve been to Paris a lot and wear my wallet in my back pocket and have been fine. Just need to be aware when going through crowded areas. They know how to pick off the naive ones who aren’t used to real cities.
> The metro is also super efficient, you can get everywhere "intra muros" in 30-40 minutes.

Yes. Both times I was there visiting, we didn't bother with even the buses. The Metro was usually a short walk, and a short wait.
It can still be a positive sum trade to purchase something from a corrupt and inefficient monopoly. Indeed generally the only reason corrupt and inefficient monopolies can stay in business is because having access to the good/service still has value to its customers, even if they'd be happier having an alternative.

Sure, VCs make a few negative sum trades when they invest in companies that aren't going to generate the exit they were hoping for, but they're aware of that and trying to balance them out with ridiculously positive sum investments anyway...
I like 4*8 ==32 hrs productivity instead of hours being spend.
Federal prosecutors investigating whether Boeing pilot lied to FAA
Too me a bit too - this explains it better I think: http://www.randomhacks.net/2005/10/11/amb-operator/
Things to know to get started with Tensorflow 2.x
Well, in fact the first one "Depressive Realism" is a common (false) myth. Depressed people tend to have distorted thoughts about reality with a strong negative bias.

A typical distorted though is over-generalization. For instance: if a depressed person fails to pass an exam, he may think that he will never be able to pass that exam and his life is a complete failure because of that. Of course that though is NOT the reality. The reality is that he probably need prepare better for that exam, but that does not mean that his life is a complete failure.

If someone is interested in this topic I recommend the book "Feeling good" by David Burns.
This quote is old and explain very well why early software was often high quality:

> “Walking on water and developing software from a specification are easy if both are frozen.”

― Edward V. Berard

The more you plan ahead and the less you change goals while writing software, the less problems you have.

Software is the only field of engineering where you can change things at any point in time. But it doesn't mean you HAVE to change things. Software should really take lesson from other fields of engineering. Companies always want to cut costs, and with software, they really can.
1. If the new hire is worth 10% more, then the employer will be able to justify that. "He's got much more experience than you" or such. Put differently: you can only offer those extra 10% if you can actually justify it in a way that others agree with you. Might actually turn out to be a rationality corrective so to say.

2. If you don't want people to job-hop because they see what some new hire earns, then you're either overpaying the new one (and unnecessarily alienating your workers) or you're underpaying the current employees, and you should raise their salary or expect them to hop.
Not the OP, but presumably to minimise the amount of jumping around in memory. Best orderbook is a small matrix, if you can get away with it (for trading you often don't need the whole orderbook, or at least don't need the whole thing on the hot path, but for an exchange obviously there's less scope for approximations).
Growth over a period of time isn't even strictly necessary for all trades to be positive sum anyway. A village economy where the basket maker trades the same number of baskets for the same amount of food every year may have a zero growth rate [assuming the baskets' lifespan is limited], but those trades are positive sum because the basket maker and the farmers using broken baskets would both be worse off if those trades didn't continue to take place.
So this seems to be a long trending topic and still without an answer
I often hear people say that software engineering is a joke compared to civil engineering or other kinds. But they forget that when a civil engineer designs a bridge he doesn't start with: "We don't know exactly what weight it should support yet, but just start building the bridge already". And he doesn't finish with a: "Ah, turns out we wanted a tunnel instead of a bridge, can we change that next sprint?".
I often hear people use that logic as a reason why software doesn't qualify as engineering
The current system of punishing people who stay long at a company is still in place because it works, and it works very well.

Lots of employees here have bought into this company spread propaganda that job hopping like in the US will make you unemployable in the future.

As the employees get older and get tied down with families and homes and also Job Stockholm Syndrome they're less likely to shop around for new jobs so the savings on salaries on seniors being paid below market are huge.
It costs less capital hence increase profit (or competitiveness) to keep this private.
Retailers would do the same with their price if it was practical. Actually, with b2b sales it is exactly the case, prices are most often kept confidential.

I'm not supporting the practice, I just don't see how it could be any different,unless you start forcing key actors in this system to disclose.
> Requirements change. Every software engineering project will face this hard problem at some point.

Rich Hickey calls this a 'situated' program in his talk from Clojure/Conj 2017, where the program has to deal with information and real-world irregularities for extended periods.

While agile disciplines help you from one perspective, your tools (e.g. program language) might also help you solve some of the problems. In this framing, Clojure certainly tries to help where the it matters most.

Highly recommended to read the transcript or watch the video, even if you are not interested in the language itself.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V1FtfBDsLU
Transcript: https://github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/blob/master/Hi...
This is often a lie. It's common for revenue generators to make as low as the company will pay them, and management who is producing little value to extract the wealth
Sometimes, that happens. But there's a mutual agreement that such change comes with significant cost, and it's this part that is missing in the software world.
Huawei leads in 5G commercial contracts, over half from Europe
> People wouldn't be job hopping if you could get the same raise as the new guys.

This sounds like a massive win for all but the bottom of the barrel tier companies. Finding and training new people (while giving them 10% more) as the old guys who know their shit leave for a better job is super expensive.
+1 The elections are coming soon and the current mayor is just doubling down on promesses (while Paris is great on paper the past couple of years did feel like chaos from my point of view)
> I'm not supporting the practice, I just don't see how it could be any different,unless you start forcing key actors in this system to disclose.

Lest the workers unionize and make it stop.
> But then they are not doing the same job, and it is reasonable that they earn more

The issue is wether everybody realizes they aren't doing the same job.

> In a grocery store

Comparing performance of people is a lot more subjective than comparing food. Your comparing apples to oranges here.

If performance was easy to compare, it'd be a lot easier to push for transparent salary information.
1. Worth is relative. You can't know the performance of someone you've just interviewed for an hour to someone who's been working there for years. The new guy might just be good at whiteboarding and negotiating but could be a mediocre employee at best on your codebase. When you get a job your pay isn't dictated by your "worth", whatever that is, but by current market conditions.

2. That's how it should be in an ideal world but the reality is different and companies know through years of experience that the current system works better for them rather than the one you'd want.
In my company publishing the salaries would make even more men leave the company; we already have a "diversity program" hiring and promoting only females, with competence left as a nice to have, but finding that the people that were hired to check some boxes and meet some targets have bigger salaries than the people that work they arses, that would be the straw for the camel.

It is very hard to have a fair discussion with the employees hired to fill some spots and tell them they are incompetent and not productive, that makes it hard to explain why they have slightly lower ratings and salaries as a result. Knowing that the bimbo next to you is at least not top rated and paid less is helping you focus on the work and support and ignore as much as possible the office politics.
> Yes, you're right and I wasn't following that. I haven't had experience with secondary markets. I had to wait a few years for an IPO and then there's the lockup.

If the company is valuable and you want cash out fast, then you can just send messages directly to investors, if you have any contacts. There are always some investors looking for that kind of deals. However it has to be significant value, like 100k +. And naturally the price will suck, if IPO is in the horizin it makes almost always sense to wait.
The pattern of some code calling a function (amb) causing the original code to get called again later with the function returning different values makes me think of React hooks. It's a very convenient pattern for some use-cases.
Dangerous by design: A cautionary tale about facial recognition
Languages of the Ottoman Empire
> One feature that is missing with this, and with every discussion forum since usenet , is a tree-view of a thread.

Uhm... have you ever heard of a little-known site called "Hackernews"?
ClearURLs is my choice as well, it seems to catch a lot more stuff, and as you say it autoupdates definitions (like uBlock Origin etc.).
USC eliminates tuition for families earning less than $80k
Nice find! The add is still there so you are right. If you look in the right place, you can find easy work.
And the parks they do have are not green. Mainly ruble.

It does have two fantastic huge parks on the outskirts though, Bois de Boulogne and Bois de Vincennes.
Do you share the opinion that software doesn’t qualify as engineering?

I’ve always thought it is a little bit of a stretch.
I don't get this.

My solution is to use uBlock Origin and block tracking altogether.

This still allows GA to track you, it just removes some information from the tracking beacon.
Crush big hard plastic balls with shredder machine Wise Experiments
Show HN: Provision and automate cloud hosts with Go
That's the thing, most "old" guys don't leave since they get too busy with their private life(building a house, having kids) or they pidgeonholed themselves into some company specific niche with few options around or they got Job Stockholm Syndrome and are less inclined to shop around for better gigs.
Philips is succesful in pivoting into medical.
As others have said, a stagnant (0% growth) economy still has many positive sum trades within it. If all trading stopped happening, you wouldn't see the GDP remain at the same level; it would crash to basically 0 as almost no one would even have access to food.

>With a total growth of 4-6%, you have to make many folks worse off in order to get ahead.

I mean, kinda, in that if you make something really good you make the person that made something slightly worse worse off, as they now don't get the money you earn instead? But this is not what you mean.

> Don't tell me tens of millions of individuals can get out of low-income situation, and billionaires can still keep getting rich, with a measley overall growth of 4-6%.

The way billionaires are rich is by controlling organisations that provide a lot of value and capture some of that value for themselves. One of them getting 10% 'richer' on paper doesn't mean that organisation grabbed some more resources from others; it's not real, current wealth, it's estimated value of total future income from that organisation.

So yes you can totally have those organisations become more valuable by more than 4-6% a year without other people losing out. You're confusing the total amount of value/utility produced in a year (which GDP is more-or-less trying to estimate) with projected total amount of value produced in all future years.
Drowning in the Data Deluge (2012) [pdf]
>Also people don't make money by creating value, they make money by picking the winners and following the money.

This is still creating value.
> Sponsors is about to hit Patreon

At least for Patreon, they have a large enough user base, this won't hit them particularly hard.
I’d be frustrated with my colleagues to know how much they make and they’d be frustrated with me. Job titles jr, 1, 2, sr are frustrating enough. I’m always surprised when I learn a great engineer is only a 1. Management uses grades like a carrot and stick. I’m all for giving people with the same job the same title.

Public grades/salary on the other hand makes it hard to work with people. You can’t look at another person without thinking of their worth and compare it to yours. It creates unnecessary drama, makes people think they’re more important than they are, and distracts from the actual work. Glassdoor and recruiters already should give you a good idea of what you’re worth. Knowing other people’s compensation will only lead to jealousy of others and others of you. It’s one of those human nature things that can’t be turned off so best not to exacerbate it.
The problem here is not that they can't obtain a development certificate. The problem is that you cannot use a development certificate to distribute an app on TestFlight or the App Store to other people.

There are two types of certificate – development certificates, which allow get-task-allow for debugging purposes and can be installed directly to a device; and distribution certificates, which do not allow get-task-allow and can be distributed through ad-hoc means, Test Flight, or the App Store.

If this app requires get-task-allow, then it needs to be signed with a development certificate to run. If it's signed with a development certificate, then it can't be distributed to other people.
Are you planning to hook your order book up to a data feed like, for example, binance[1] to see how your book performs?

[1] https://github.com/binance-exchange/binance-official-api-doc...
I just left my remarks. Here's what I wrote, just for the sake of public record (last time we played this game there was a lot of comments thrown out, unfairly).

The internet is a critical part of both military and civilian infrastructure and should not be monitored, limited, or in any way restricted by any entity. Under the definition of arms understood at the time of the Constitution (as written by James Madison in Federalist 46), the internet and any digital tools which may be used in the defense of the nation are "arms" and therefore protected by the second amendment.

Further, because the internet is ubiquitous in modern society as a means of communication, much more so than letters were at the time of the constitution, the government has no right whatsoever to restrict access or use of the internet. Even if there were a disagreement over this interpretation, there can be no doubt that the general public 'assembles' and 'petitions' using the internet. This petition itself is being written on the internet. All this ignores the simple truth that the internet is the most common means of distribution for the press worldwide.

Finally, because the federal government has singularly supported, with enormous sums of taxpayer dollars, the internet infrastructure which is now (against the interest of the public, for which the federal government is a trustee) owned by private corporations, all internet infrastructure should be treated as public property, and ISP's should act only in a capacity of providing a utility service.

In summary - there should be no privatization of internet infrastructure. There should be no government or corporation monitoring anyone's use of the internet (without a proper warrant, signed by a judge, on a case-by-case basis). A person's digital information should be treated as 'papers' and 'effects' as they are considered to be by the general public and by most experts in the subject. And lastly, there should be absolutely zero limits, restrictions, rationing, throttling, or other mitigation of any person's access to a completely free and open internet.
Inrupt, Tim Berners-Lee's Solid, and Me
How to Find the Exact Time of a GitHub Commit
> "Many students will have preconceptions about how economies work that will be challenged by the results shown here."

I wonder what those preconceptions might be.
I'm not sure if you considered fully what I said.

Are you telling me that capital powerhouses aiming for 8-20% year over year, and consistently having it their way, in an economy of best case 4-6% with instances of 2%, 0%, and negative mixed in, and a population consistently growing by 1-3%, still leaves the rest of the population with growth?

Can I sell you a bridge?
"Good" doesn't change the interval modifier on a card; "Easy" does, however.
> Worth is relative. You can't know the performance of someone you've just interviewed for an hour to someone who's been working there for years

Supposedly you can because you're offering them 10% more than the rest of your employees...
A musician plays the violin during brain surgery
The current situation is that you get a raise if you change jobs. So anyone who wants a better salary is currently very much encouraged to hop jobs.

If companies had pressure to give raises internally, this would give less reason to hop jobs. I think that's a good thing for mostly everyone (including their employers). Everyone except dirt cheap shops where nobody wants to work anyway if they have choices.