skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I see a lot of comments along the lines of "plenty of candidates" ... Which is probably true, but the candidates are preselected for tolerance of the process and capacity to study and prepare relentlessly. There is a reputational impact that over the long term has real consequences.
It links to articles in over 80 languages. So on one hand it does a really good job at cross linking. On the other hand, missing out on linking to the languages you mention seems like a huge error.
Well, I'm interested and will purchase this.
Context for the lazy, jgrahamc is the longtime CTO of Cloudflare.
I think the double entendre here is pretty limited to primarily English speakers.

Johann Elert Bode was German, so I'm not sure if the meaning of the word holds there.
For balance, all big cloud providers - aws, gcp, azure, oracle [0] have pretty similar startup plans. Y$$MV

(I'm in full agreement with everything you've written + it's well-phrased and funny. gj!)

[0] that's not a typo - there is such thing as "Oracle cloud"
This was dramatized in Hidden Figures but apparently based on fact: [1]

> As a computer, she calculated the trajectory for Alan Shepard, the first American in space. Even after NASA began using electronic computers, John Glenn requested that she personally recheck the calculations made by the new electronic computers before his flight aboard Friendship 7 – the mission on which he became the first American to orbit the Earth.

[1]: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/katherine-johnson-the-girl-who-...
To be pedantic a bachelor is a man that is not, and has never been, married. A man that is not married may be a bachelor, a divorcé, or a widower. But bachelor is still used colloquially (in the US) for all three (but not as often for a widower). Now if the age of the person is under a certain age, most people would not seriously call them a bachelor yet, but the cut-off age varies culturally. Now married is a bit complicated too.. married in the eyes of the law, formally or common-law, in a particular country, in the eyes of a particular church?

Also, my aunt is a Bachelor of Arts, and her martial statues doesn't effect that.

Language, life, and business logic is messy, confusing, and conditional/contextual to the point of absurdity. You will never realistically reduce it to pure mathematics in a way that makes it easier to deal with.
You don't need aggressiveness. You're already passive-aggressive, which is not any better than aggressive-aggressive. The answer is not to become a bigger bully to get your way more often.

You need to learn how to argue persuasively. You also need to be right, it's not enough to have strong convictions, it's much easier to convince people and build consensus when you are (more) right or have a better answer.

Or if you find out you are wrong, maybe you adopt the other person's perspective, not sulk away feeling put down. Either way, "winning" an argument means everybody wins, not just you got your way.

Believe me, unless you work for and with only idiot politicians, people notice and don't care for obnoxious loudmouths. If they're always winning when you think they are wrong, you either do in fact work in a horrible political organization, or you are just wrong (AND probably work in a horrible political organization).
Twitter verified is inherently a flawed system. I personally know people who got it simply because they knew people who worked at Twitter.

Let's not kid ourselves that most high-tech companies based out the bay area are going to have very heavily biased political beliefs and opinions. Remember the Twitter employee (now-ex) that deleted Trump's twitter account?
Particularly in Vegas, which was the original analogy.
Wonder how this would compare with Watson at playing Jeopardy...
It was not well liked.

The majority of webpages did not use it, or it was used very sparingly for things like form validation.

Old versions of IE would have a dialog pop up if there was any kind of error during execution which happened frequently.
Ask HN: How do you write quality iOS codebases?
I have been doing both front end development and iOS development for 5 years. I have found that on the front end, its gotten pretty easy to write clean maintainable code. Tools like Redux lets you cleanly move businesses logic out of the view layer and React allows you to have an easily written declarative interface.

iOS seems pretty far behind in code quality. Most iOS projects I have seen have thousands of lines long view controllers containing tons of logic, globals everywhere, 200 line functions, little to no unit testing, and no architecture. For those experienced iOS devs out there - do you have healthy iOS code bases you are proud of, and what do those look like from an architecture standpoint?

I have personally tried to introduce different types of architectures like MVVM and even Redux, but this has always been rocky on iOS, both from a tech standpoint because you are working against the ecosystem, and from a human perspective because (and this is a huge generalization) a lot of iOS devs tend to have an old school mentality and don't see the issues I am pointing out as problems - thats just how things work on iOS.

I would love to hear from someone that has experience cleaning up messy legacy iOS codebases, or examples of healthy iOS architectures that are open source.
DeFiance: Billion-dollar finance, million-dollar hacks
Did you read the comment that I originally replied to? Dude said that in plain text.

Japan is a funny case actually. Massive corporations play a big role there. Both historically and nowadays. Yes, those big corporations take care of their workers. But it doesn't change the fact, that the rich are barely limited in that country.
I question the enforceability of such a patent - it seems like a mere technicality of phrasing. For example, on Facebook you send someone a friend request which has to be agreed to by them before additional functionality is unlocked. I don't see how applying such a standard interaction mechanism to a dating app in particular is in any way innovative; it seems analogous to the online shopping cart patent that Newegg invalidated back in 2013.

More likely, Tinder intends to use the mere threat of court proceedings to stifle any potential competition.

Edit: Another comment linked to the patent (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22408610), and it's... really verbose and complicated (as usual). It seems to revolve around having the aforementioned request-response procedure, while simultaneously using the requests and responses to determine other likely matches to present to the participants. I would summarize it as "Netflix ranking applied to dating app user requests", and remain highly skeptical of any supposed innovation. One thing is for certain though: paying a law firm to dissect this thing and argue it in court would cost you a small fortune.
Filtering out the same men the women themselves would choose to filter out.
15 minutes from Palo Alto to SF via a VTOL Aircraft?
Doesn't Signal have such a tethered desktop version? https://signal.org/download/ mentions desktop.
Because the middleman is not just any middleman, it's someone in your network, who is vested in you having a good experience so that you continue to be valuable to them and vice versa. The middleman will do some due diligence before recommending two people to each other.
Imagine thinking the answer to a vast societal problem involves making yet another app for your ipotato. A vast societal problem more or less directly attributable to apps on the ipotato.

Put your imbecile phone down, leave the house and talk to people, you gibbering goons. Pay attention to others, not your nerd dingus: you might notice things. Better yet, leave your dystopian shit hole American city hellscape and find people who don't require a nerd dildo for self validation.
Unfortunately sometimes it's just the luck of the draw on who you got as your interviewer. Remember that it is expected for false negatives so it is totally normal to just apply again in a year.

The thing you can do to help yourself is to study; there are only so many problems you can be asked. Most candidates don't. That gets you a lot of the way there. I used "Cracking the Coding Interview".

You are doing the right thing in interviewing as much as possible; interviewing is a skill that you get better with with practice. _Always_ ask your recruiter afterwards where your weak points were. Again, people make the mistake of thinking that their coding skills are entirely correlated with how they interview; this is 100% false. People can interview better but be technically weaker all-round and get an offer, or they can interview poorly and be the best technical candidate in the world and be rejected.

I hope this is helpful, I realize all of this stuff is demoralizing. As I said in my post, I strongly believe I wouldn't have passed a full Google interview round. Sometimes you just need luck on your side, but the more you interview, the better the odds things fall into place.
One thought that I had after reading the article was just how average his experience was. This is really the bog-standard "how my Google interview went" post and not some kind of outlier.

One complaint that I have seen over and over (even in this thread) is his frustrating moment #3: "Google doesn't respect your time". That's of course entirely subjective and many people may be ok with months of preparation, days of interviews and weeks of waiting for feedback (with recruiters occasionally going dark for months). But many folks are justifiably irked.
Agreed, prostitution aside, there's a whole grey area here of what's societally acceptable to pay for and what's not, and I don't believe anybody is a true moral arbiter of where that line is.

For example, buying "ad space" (basically Tinder Highlights or Bumble Spotlight, or beyond) with your face on it would be considered not "buying" someone, it would be acceptable. It's just you paying to put your face on a digital billboard, in the hopes to be seen by someone.

Sending someone super-likes, that's again paying for signaling interest, in the hopes that she matches with you.

Paying 20 bucks for extra digital flowers in Coffee Meets Bagel, when liking someone, isn't buying that person, that's again paying to signal interest.

Sending someone $1000 worth of actual roses with your number on a card. That's paying to get someone's attention and signal your interest.

None of that is forcing anybody to do anything, but of course the more you pay, the more they're likely to feel like they need to reciprocate.

And yes, of course some men will feel entitled to get something in return, just like some men will feel entitled to get sex because they paid for lobster dinner. There will always be a scummy, entitled and exploitative portion of the male dating population that will require education or flat out avoidance. They're there, with or without dating apps.

Maybe the key here is that the money doesn't go to the woman. Maybe someone can bid $1000 on a date with someone they really desire, but the money would go to a charity if she accepts and actually shows up. Make the patriarchy pay for important charitable causes :)
Age, Race, and Gender Affect Software Engineering Pay
This article demonstrates the same failings as the dating apps its author wishes to disrupt.

It does not discuss the safety concerns of dating, either online or offline. It does not discuss the cost of identity verification and other security measures. It does not discuss the revenue model at all.

Craigslist and Tinder work because it's no more risky than chatting with a stranger at a bar, assuming you're smart and invite them to meet at a public place first.

AM works [1] because it charges significant amounts of money and works very hard at background checks.

All other sites in-between fail because they want to be the 'Amazon/eBay of dating', wherein they stand up a classifieds site with profiles, refuse to charge enough money to perform background checks, and promptly turn into a lemon market populated by malicious actors who are represented as vetted and safe.

There is no mistaking what you're getting on Craigslist or Tinder for "vetted and safe". You're getting a complete stranger who you haven't seen in person yet. If that's your bag, you're set.

There is no mistaking what you're getting on AshleyMadison, either. It's what they say and they work very hard, and charge quite a lot, to ensure that you'll only meet safe and vetted people.

If you want to play the in-between market, you need to charge a lot of money for accounts and use most of that money to vet people's identity. You can charge less money than a specialist site like AM ("affairs only"), but you can't have any free users, or you'll just become a lemon market like all the rest.

It's unfortunate that AM is so focused on affairs, because their model is the only one that seems to be working as an alternative to the classified-ads approach. Safety and secrecy cost a lot more than Okcupid was ever willing to charge.

[1] Not that AM is any more successful, and in fact might be more fraudulent than the rest! e.g. https://gizmodo.com/ashley-madison-code-shows-more-women-and...
It might be a lemon market for older age categories, but that can't be the case for younger people. They've just entered the market, people born in 2000 are at least 19, if not 20.
How do you define success? Adoption? Because right now, writing "we will use machine learning to solve X" in a grant proposal is an easy way to increase chances of getting funding.
This is awesome. I’d definitely watch the videos!!
F5 brings WAF app protection to the Nginx platform
If you want hypotheticals, here is what Winston Churchill had to say on the topic in a speech to the US Congress after the war was won.

President Roosevelt one day asked what this War should be called. My answer was, "The Unnecessary War." If the United Stated States had taken an active part in the League of Nations, and if the League of Nations had been prepared to use concerted force, even had it only been European force, to prevent the re-armament of Germany, there was no need for further serious bloodshed. If the Allies had resisted Hitler strongly in his early stages, even up to his seizure of the Rhineland in 1936, he would have been forced to recoil, and a chance would have been given to the sane elements in German life, which were very powerful especially in the High Command, to free Germany of the maniacal Government and system into the grip of which she was falling.Do not forget that twice the German people, by a majority, voted against Hitler, but the Allies and the League of Nations acted with such feebleness and lack of clairvoyance, that each of Hitler's encroachments became a triumph for him over all moderate and restraining forces until, finally, we resigned ourselves without further protest to the vast process of German re-armament and war preparation which ended in a renewed outbreak of destructive war. Let us profit at least by this terrible lesson. In vain did I attempt to teach it before the war.

In his book The Gathering Storm, he adds several more points where Hitler could have been easily stopped before he started.
Deep Thoughts Engineering Speaker Series: John Carmack
2020.08 Altered Noise – Rakudo Weekly News
I would argue that it is not that hard to compete with those app stores if you find something important they lack (e.g. freedom/reliability). F-Droid is very popular considering it is not preinstalled.
I believe it's from the same founder who did seeking.com, right?
RLax: A library for implementing reinforcement learning agents
From my perspective in the US, I absolutely reject your statement.
> Just don't call it a "datacenter" or NVIDIA will have a stroke.

Context please :) ?
There's lots of interesting facets here. Doug's solution requires a working Unix system. You might not have that in the problem space.

On the other hand, his solution shows that by assuming some nice things about your data, things which Pascal does not allow, you can do some useful things with terse programming. This is reminiscent of the array programming model of APL or J. I haven't written a solution but I'd be surprised if it is more than about 15 characters.

In the shell case, the terse program is like a Chinese classic. Written in its own jargon requiring basically a prior understanding of the program to read it.
My argument still stands that Canadian health care should not be considered the final word in health care (which is not a very controversial opinion if we're being honest). I'll cite another report by the Wait Time Alliance, but I'll first quote their mission statement so we can rest assured that it won't have any taint of political bias:

> Mission Statement: WTA physicians are concerned over delayed access to health care for Canadians. We work collaboratively with our stakeholders to inform, advocate, and provide solutions to achieve timely, appropriate and equitable access to high-quality health care.

And now from the 2015 report itself (the most recent one):

> "Ontario reports that the maximum amount of
time that nine out of 10 patients with complex needs
spent to complete their ED visit and be admitted to the
hospital was 25.7 hours (June 2015). The maximum
amount of time that nine out of 10 patients with minor or
uncomplicated conditions stayed in the ED was 4 hours.
As outlined in previous WTA reports, many of the factors
responsible for the lengthy waits to be admitted to a
hospital bed are system-wide failures such as high
numbers of ALC patients and a lack of community-based
supports."

On primary care:

> Wait times are reported for each of the five regional
primary care networks in the province. The average wait
time for an appointment between January and March
2015 was 23 days, ranging from 0 to 72 days.

I can see a primary care doctor within 1-2 days here in the US. Even when I was on welfare, the wait times were no more than a few days.

So this report seems to be consistent with the one you were complaining about (which by the way was circulated and referenced widely by mainstream media). However, I see no evidence of "political bias" in this one so I hope you can accept that this isn't that controversial. These wait times are clear facts, not opinions. An opinion would be "Canada has the best health care system", which I am arguing against, citing facts.

Source: http://www.waittimealliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/EN...

No, I do not think the US has the best system either, but pointing to Canada as a target benchmark is a non-starter from the way I see it.
Actual links to the projects would be useful. ;)
I mean... maybe.

I just don't see societies impressions about gender roles changing anytime soon.

Woman are still taught that they have to be hard to get and can't come off as "easy".

And Men are largely taught that getting a Woman is a conquest or somehow contributing to them "being a man".

Also I do feel the need to point out that on Grindr much of the same things that would be considered harassment on other apps is still there, it is just assumed to be part of the Grindr experience and not seen as harassment (by most at least).

(Purposefully not throwing in Trans here since that further complicates what I am trying to say and makes the assumed power differences even more problematic)

Also btw, if it isn't clear by now. I am saying this as someone on Grindr and other gay apps.
It's not clear there has been any deep impact actually, but there has been a lot of discussion (and grant proposals)

I've seen a lot of cross pollination of ML and AI techniques into various disciplines. A large percentage just didn't work at all, most of the rest were more "kind of interesting, but". Nothing earthshaking happened although pop sci press likes to talk about it a lot.

If you have more digital data than you used to, using modern free frameworks and toolkits to do basic (i.e. older, boring, but understood) ML stuff to understand it seems to have a reasonable return. Mostly I think this is because it becomes accessible to someone without much background in the area, and you can do reasonable things without having to put 6 months of reading and implementing together before starting.
You've just confirmed the parent's point.

"they generally don't have to give hourly workers paid sick time."

..is exactly why you should expect them to take something for their fever, turn up for their shift and say absolutely nothing to anyone about feeling unwell.
Hiding malicious text from scanners using font substitution [pdf]
System Engineering Guidelines
At no point you're paying for sex, no?
- Or AMD could change their policy of 'never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity' and offer high-performance OpenCL GPGPU offerings. Then nVidia could have all the stroke they wanted.

- Or Tensorflow/Pytorch could've crapped on OpenCL a little less by releasing a fully functional OpenCL version everytime they released a fully functional Cuda version, instead of worshipping Cuda year in and year out.

- Or Google could start selling their TPUv2, if not TPUv3, while they're on the verge of releasing TPUv4.

- Or one of the other big-tech's Facebook/Microsoft/Intel could make and start selling a TPU-equivalent device.

- Or I could finish school and get funded to do all/most of the above ;)

edit: On a more serious note, a cloud/on-prem hybrid is absolutely the right way to go. You should have a 4x 2080 ti rig available 24x7 for every ML engineer. It costs about $6k-8k a piece [0]. Prototype the hell out of your models on on-prem hardware. Then when your setup is in working condition and starts producing good results on small problems, you're ready to do a big computation for final model training. Then you send it to the cloud, for final production run. (Guess what, on a majority of your projects, you might realize, the final production run could be carried out on on-prem itself; you just have to keep it running 24 hours-a-day for a few days or up to a couple weeks.)

[0]: https://l7.curtisnorthcutt.com/the-best-4-gpu-deep-learning-...
Stories like these scare the hell out of me. What do you do if one of the big internet corporation deletes some resource or account that is critical to your business? What happens when support isn’t responsive and you don’t have contacts in the company or your HN post doesn’t get visibility?

I get it - these are free services. You should factor that into every decision. But the risk is real even if you pay for an account. I’ve been slowly moving away from Gmail to a custom domain, but something like loosing DNS records and not being able to restore them quickly is even worse.

Back up everything that can be backed up, don’t rely on a single provider and always have a continuity plan!
Monitor AWS Managed IAM Policies Changes – Now on Twitter
No, Troy specifically mentions differing requirements depending on the country that the ousource firm is located in.

>Another pattern I found time and time again when outsourcing to India was that they'd want really detailed documentation. This is always going to be a contentious issue and there are many different views of how much should be done under what circumstances. But more so in India than the other two locations I'll talk about shortly, detail was important to them. There were many occasions where we would make assumptions that a feature requirement clearly implied certain things only to later discover they was deemed "out of scope". Now that can happen in any project in any part of the world, but it was extremely prevalent in India.

> On the plus side for China though, one of their strengths (particularly over India) was the ability to get down to work with minimal documentation.
Prior art (ie publicly published examples) invalidates patents, at least in the western world. To that end, if you invent something that you don't intend to patent you should publicly write about it if possible.
To be fair, I didn't start programming in JavaScript until 2000, but even back then I could see that it would be a game changer for the web.