skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The questions are indeed puzzles; that's why Gayle Laakmann and others have made a living publishing books of the questions themselves. And the puzzles are distinctly different from the content in the majority of CSE curricula.

What's more is problematic is that the construction and evaluation of the puzzles is highly subjective and nearly everywhere lacks rigor. Completion time is a key metric while quality of communication is most commonly either ignored or not assessed at all uniformly among interviews.

(Aside: what's frustrating is that companies make candidates sign NDAs for on-sites; these prevent candidates for disclosing or _selling_ the information they might glean in the process, which very rarely happens. In actuality, it's the former interviewers who violate protections for "confidential info" and copyright when they go and monetize their experience post-job, or even on-the-job e.g. Rooftop Slushie).

> Most of us are not interested in ruining the day of someone who is unhappy with the hiring process

That's only true in so far as you, as an employee, are paid to achieve positive sentiment among candidates, no matter how shallow that sentiment may be. That's indeed cruel, and it's well-established that interviewers are widely unaware of the consequences of the current hiring process. That's why we get articles like those from the OP.

A true interest in improving the hiring process includes:
* Making prep materials and courses freely available (helps industry candidates)
* Committing time to CSE outreach to better integrate company needs to CSE (helps new grads)
* Finding questions that reflect real tasks on the job (helps the evaluation have a chance of being predictive)
* Closing the information gap between hiring managers and candidates: disclosure (in aggregate) of hiring rates, salaries, etc.

Playing along and doing hundreds of coding puzzle interviews is a waste of time for all involved.
> Everybody agrees the patent system is broken. The problem is nobody can propose a better alternative.

Here are two proposals, pick the one you like better:

1) Abolish patents completely.

2) Abolish patents, except for pharmaceutical industry.

If anything, proposal number 2 should be strictly better than the status quo.
>>> You've got time to make a cup of coffee if you need to delete a node_modules folder...

> Deleting from Windows Explorer, it took 20s.

> `rmdir /s /q` from your SU link - 4s

OK, so you saw that your scenarios could run much better, especially if Windows Explorer is avoided. But in Explorer, is that time you measured with deleting to the Recycle Bin or with the Shift Delete (which deletes irreversibly but can be faster)?

Additionally, I'd guess you don't have to wait at all (i.e. you can reduce it to 0 seconds) if you first rename the folder and than start deleting that renamed one and let it doing that in the background while continuing with your work -- e.g. if you want to create the new content in the original location it's immediately free after the rename, and the rename is practically immediate.
I doubt they'd do that because it'd be bad for Lambda's financials.
Native Dependencies in Android Studio 4.0
I’m really sorry to hear you feel stuck. I hope you come out the other end of this with good prospects in spite of the inadequate training Lambda is providing.

Thanks for adding your insight and experience to this thread.
For me they are the embodiment of the "cheap tacky plastic" sentiment.
Top Free Programming Books for Front-End Developers
Your links completely fail to cast any of their targets in a negative light.
More specifically perhaps that very early employees should organize, and push for this. In particular, to counteract management incentives that may otherwise throw them under the bus. Agree it’s not identical to VC case, but similar enough that as a mechanism it could work.
You realize that there are colleges offering degrees in philosophy, right? And they don't even give you a refund when you find out the 4 years of education was useless.
> this is discriminatory against people with families and and commitments that prevent them from spending hundreds of hours in prep

Maybe but its not the purpose to select people with families or commitment. You choose to have families or commitment, you have to deal with the trade off.

>An arms race for more and more difficult weeder questions?

Its always be an arm race. Why to expect otherwise ?
> At one point, I tried directly asking candidates how they'd prefer to be interviewed in a way that best highlighted their talents.

This is really cool to hear from someone else. I've done a similar thing, asking "What do you think you could do during a technical interview to best showcase your skills?"

I too got a surprising number of terrible/generic answers, though it very likely could have been nerves in the moment.
Note that a16z is an RIA now - not a VC anymore. Recent news stories tell of them planning on investing up to $1B in crypto. As an RIA, they can make riskier investments.

Here is the governments claim (3):

"Grams are securities because the Initial Purchasers and subsequent investors expect to profit from Telegram’s work: the development of a TON “ecosystem,” integration with Messenger, and implementation of the new TON Blockchain."

TON failed the Howey test by their offering in the US markets and - this is the critical part not mentioned - they refused to acknowledge or respond to the SEC. Full-stop, end of story. The courts can start to wrap it up on April 30.
Fixed Url: https://github.com/inlets/inlets-pro/blob/master/docs/caddy-...
So much this. Every place I've interviewed at wants cookie-cutter candidates.

I didn't think of the solution you had in mind, because I've identified another problem that you didn't consider. And somehow that takes me out of the running. Good luck with that.

Not to mention the nebulous and vaguely discriminatory "cultural fit" problem. So, even if I manage to ace the technical, I still fail.
I only recognize difference between junior/senior levels.

My definition of senior developer:

- Senior will not be "stuck" with a problem. They recognize there is somebody to get help from and they will seek it. But they can also function when there is no person to get technical help from. They will dig, and dig, and dig, until they finally solve the problem.

- I can trust the solution to be usable even without supervision.

- They will have minimum standard they will enforce around them (ownership). Ownership for me means they will look for things that are not right and act on it, without being specifically instructed to.

- Is adult in behavior, can recognize and control their emotions, can work with other people, recognize and deal with communication problems.

From my perspective, people who have huge technical knowledge and experience but can't be trusted with tasks, can't be trusted to not get conflicted with the team on the first possible occasion, are not honest with their results (hide problems), will sacrifice good of the project because they just have to test that new tech -- all these people are junior devs for me.
> I don't know of a single mathematician who has ODed on amphetamines, and only one who voted for Trump (Dan Kleitman)

I'm a mathematician who thinks that your sequence of posts here isn't serving the purpose you seem to think it does. I don't think that addressing it point by point serves much purpose, but these two claims bothered me particularly, so I single them out for response.

I speak to your second point first: surely you don't think that there is only one mathematician who voted for Trump? Unless you do, it is irrelevant that you only know one; there are surely lots of others out there. I didn't, and I don't know any mathematician that I know did, but I know at least a few mathematicians who I know voted for GWB, and I imagine that there have to be at least a few other Trump voters in my mathematical circle.

The first part in particular, in addition to the same quibble about what it matters whether or not you personally know such people (as opposed to whether or not they exist), probably requires an overly restrictive definition of 'mathematician' as "someone with academic credentials, or other official recognition, as a practitioner of mathematics". I personally don't think that's a good definition of a mathematician, and I don't think that advancing such definitions is a good thing for the future of our profession.
So, sort of like the Iranian revolution, except instead of Shia clerics, it will be mathematicians sitting in the Assembly of Experts.

I've heard worse suggestions. I assume the trains will at least run on time. Will the budget get balanced, that's another question.
CI during the first phases of development in my experience is now often done with modern tooling (gitlab CI, Jenkins), compiling and running tests on a regular Linux x86 build server. Later phases switch over to some sort of emulated test harness, with interrupts coming from simulated flight hardware. Obviously the further along in the development process, the more expensive and slow it is to run tests. Maybe some software groups (SpaceX?) have a process that allows for tight test loops all the way to actual hardware in the loop tests.
94% of the Fortune 1000 are seeing supply chain disruptions
Yeah, that train left the station a long long time ago. But it is good advice for people who haven't been on the net long enough. Another fun fact, get your HAM license and "whoops" they use your address as the station address.
Historically, the classic graph structures are adjacency lists and adjacency matrices. Those are quite easy to represent in Rust if you use indices instead of pointers. Node/Pointer type graph structures aren't particularly efficient anyway, even in C or C++.
Because hiring doesn’t have to be this adversarial process. And work doesn’t have to be this dehumanizing race to the bottom that excludes qualified people who are being excluded by bad metrics.
There is no luggage storage at any US airport
> What is tragic here is the amount of effort that is now expended by young computer scientists into the game of algorithms.

This is a funny topic to me. A decade ago, before Leetcode, Hackerrank, and Cracking The Coding Interview, it was common for developers to complain that software developers were losing touch with algorithmic knowledge. HN-type websites were full of discussions about clueless software engineers doing damage to companies by implementing O(n^2) algorithms that worked fine on small datasets but failed in production. It was popular to complain that modern libraries, frameworks, and programming languages were making developers too soft to write good code.

The industry responded by re-emphasizing the value of CS fundamentals and algorithmic knowledge. The training industry responded with easy tools to teach and learn these algorithms. The internet is full of easily accessible materials to teach these principles to anyone motivated enough to Google it.

Now, the popular narrative has flipped. Internet comment sections want to hate algorithms and suggest that programmers don't need to understand the basics. Just rely on the frameworks and libraries to do the right thing. Just Google the solution and weave the libraries together to do what you want.

> Whereas a young programmer in the past may have spent their extra days writing games in Basic or static web pages, hackers these days seem to do Leetcode until the wheels come off.

Young programmers don't wake up in the morning and choose between writing static web pages or grinding leetcode. There are more opportunities than ever before to learn whatever you want.

Have you actually worked with students lately? Leetcode style systems are a lot of fun for people. It's a straight to the point system that teaches algorithms and other fundamentals in self-contained brain teasers that are straight to the point. And it's trivially easy to Google for supporting training material. In my experience, the same people who are self-motivated enough to build web pages and games are frequently also interested in Leetcode style brain teasers.

People aren't choosing between one or the other. That's a false dichotomy. All of the highly driven students I've worked with have a range of experience from toy projects to Leetcode style learning challenges.
> New technology, he truly believed was preventing innocent civilians from being killed.

Drones and missiles are definitely a step forward compared to previous technology in many regards, but I can't help but be reminded of people who argued that the development and use of napalm would reduce human suffering by putting an end to the war in Vietnam faster.

For an interesting and rather nuanced (but not 100% realistic) view on drone strikes, I'd recommend giving the 2015 movie Eye in the Sky a watch.

Another issue with drone strikes and missiles is "the bravery of being out of range": it's easier to make the decision to kill someone who you're just watching on a screen than it is to look a person in the eyes and decide to have them killed.
I can see the short term benefit, but inevitably some big content distributor would want to opt out on condition of providing their content to Netflix due to some disadvantage they perceive with it. From there more and more content providers would want to opt out (“Disney does it, we should do it too because it makes us more like Disney”) and then the feature becomes useless and people who use it get mad.
If blendle makes a chrome/ff extension that redirects you from the website to blendle it'd be perfect. Right now I have to go to the app and search for the article I want, and then the article doesn't show up in search, and then I give up.
Good description. I've found it easy to explain to people that data scientists are often your explorers or researchers, the folks that go out and deal with raw, uncleaned, poorly modeled information, looking for relationships that are relevant to the business/study.

Data Engineers are the folks that show up once the boss says 'yeah that's good enough we want to see the result of that process/model/algorithm on an ongoing basis'...now what was likely a pile of unsystemized jupyter notebooks and excel needs to get cleaned, sytemized and productionalized, preferably in tools designed to handle pipelines and scheduled jobs etc.
By the way the word pivot is largely misunderstood

It means to change the approach while maintaining the vision and values

My values have always been on teamwork and knowledge creation and I pivoted in the sense of changing the approach but not in the sense of changing the vision
Missing non-Unix OS like VMS.
Btw you have a missing table error at the page: http://www.strategic-options.com/trade/portfolio/hardline

(this is the Portfolio button URL in the nav bar)
If we keep overreacting it will only get worse. So far the ratio is 1000 news articles per death. The consequences of the self induced panic will be worse than the virus it seems.
If in typical work settings people work in groups to solve work problems, then in typical interview setting interviewer should also work in group with interviewee in order to have relevant estimate of interviewee performance?

Such collaborative interview setup also addresses interviewee concern that interviewer may not value interviewee time.
The transaction has impacts beyond the immediate direct interaction, and those must also be considered. Examples:

* The company now has more money for research and development, which will result in the creation of new value.

* Demand has been demonstrably increased (from the moment before the transaction), providing a small but real signal that production should increase. Increased production will result in new value being created.

And so on. This is all on average, of course. Some companies destroy value through incompetence, ignorance, malicious action, or other mechanisms.
The manual seems to quickly disqualify the system. The numbers don't line up in the TOC in horrible ways. Then a little ways down there's a wrap figure that's got a horrible spacing problem. These indicate to me that the shiny new foundations are really quite wobbly.
This is all wrong

>IBR is not capped

It's capped at the 10 year pay off amount.

> takes 25 years for forgiveness

That's only for people who borrowed before 2014. For people after it's only 20 years.

>equires payments the entire time (regardless of whether or not you have an income)

Nope. Deferment time counts towards the 20 years. And you will never be required to make payments if you have no income.

>the amount forgiven is treated as taxable income (so you get a tax bomb when you actually receive the benefit)

Nope. Only the amount forgiven up to the point of solvency. If you don't manage to pay off your debts in 20 years time, you likely lack assets, which means almost none of it will be treated as income.
Alternately there would be open forums and corporate forums and they would be very different. But tech companies wouldn't own speech and would be liable since they can police their platforms as they demonstrate.
That could very well change if enough states enter the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...

There's a CGP Grey video about it too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUX-frlNBJY
Born again: Decommissioned airplanes get a new lease on life
US Gas Pipeline Shut After Ransomware Attack
HOW IN THE WORLD is this guy unemployed?!

(A: Well, he won't be much longer!)

He writes extremely well. He summarizes a great deal of feedback and knowledge really well. I don't care if he can code -- though evidently he can. Who would pass him up??

Granted, there's the question of whether he fits any particular job opening. But still, there must be many job offerings out there that he could fill if only the people doing the hiring could see that he's got something very special going on.

If you work in a team, in a large company, you need great communications skills almost more than anything else. He's got that down pat.

Jared Nelsen is going places. Ten years from now, when I see his name in the news, I'll enjoy knowing that I saw this a decade earlier.
I can't speak for what the rest of the industry does, but some chip manufacturers provide decent emulators, so you can run some tests there. We have also done some hardware tests where we connect our hardware to a raspberry pi or similar and run our CI there. It doesn't replace real-world testing, but it does get us some of the way there.
Show HN: An all-in-one customer support solution
So I guess you’ve never seen someone being fed an answer during an interview.

Trust me, it happens for certain applicants.
I only object that they get both the rights of platform and publisher. they are free to moderate however they wish but once they do they should be liable for the content of their platform. No other publishers are not held liable.
Drop-off and mail-in ballots where there is ample time to fill out a ballot are also a great option. This exists where I live in (all cities), King County, WA; and probably other parts of the state too.
Despite the (2019) in the submission title, the letter was published today (2020-02-22).
Crazy -- rocks that resonate and sound like metal!

Unfortunately that article gives zero explanation of how certain rocks can produce resonant tones that sound like metal, but another one does, specifically that the rocks need to be under internal stresses, analogous to a tightened guitar string: [1]

"...it does suggest strongly that the ringing ability is a direct result of internal stresses. ... A possible source of the stresses would likely be the loading stresses from the time when the rock crystallized. ... This "relict stress" theory implies that the ringing rock boulders act much like a guitar string. When a guitar string is limp it does not resonate, but a plucked string will provide a range of sounds depending on the level of applied tension. Likewise, a ringing rock boulder will only emit a dull thud if the boulder is de-stressed; however, boulders will resonate at various frequencies depending on the level of residual stress."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringing_rocks#Ringing_ability
I don't think people pay that well for used camera gear. Nobody wants last year's model for the price of this year's model, even if it still takes good photos.

In my case, I wanted to sell the previous model of a camera after the new one came out. To upgrade, of course. They offered about $100 on a $400 camera, and sold used ones for about $300. That's a big cut, so I decided not to upgrade and am perfectly happy.

My time to make a listing somewhere, collect offers, vet a one-off purchaser, and pay for shipping was probably more than $200, so it was actually a good deal. It's not a good deal if you operate at scale and can get the efficiency up, however. So if you wanted to start a business, you could probably eat their lunch. (Or fragment the market and put everyone out of business!)

I mostly buy old film cameras used from them. People selling them on eBay bought a custom-made 4x5 camera for $6000, don't want it anymore, but can't bear to see "their baby" go for less than $5999. People selling to B&H are less emotionally attached so the prices are better.
I worked at a company where the interview process was basically "ask them about their experience, successes, and failures, and do whatever technical screen you feel works." Other than asking about failures (not everyone does) it was just "eh, wing it, tell us what you think." The hiring manager had to then weigh the responses and convince his/her manager if it was a go (we once rejected someone on ethical grounds after they passed all the interviews).

And the funny thing is, that got us a pretty good set of people. Even funnier: both the very best of them, and the absolute worst of them, eventually ended up at Google.

I guess if you can spend what Google spends; have a ruthless hiring process; can afford to carry dead weight indefinitely; have a standardized engineering culture; and have an endless supply of projects covering every conceivable skill level and impact to the company -- then you can probably hire your way to whatever FAANG-like cohort you think will work.

But if you have those things you're probably already a FAANG-like company.

For everybody else, I am not convinced there is a better system than "everybody use your best judgement, and have people who give a shit do the hiring."