skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm a big fan of TDD and I personally get very little value out of the tests I write. However, they generate considerably more value when other engineers start working on the code. Also, when I haven't looked at a code base for a sufficiently long time I'm effectively no longer the engineer who wrote the tests. In both of these cases they become wonderful because, by design, TDD tests capture intent.

I am a little leery of yet another buzzword though. Reading the article just made me think yeah, you should rigorously think about what you're actually specifying, whether it's by formal or informal reasoning. I would actually claim the code the author picked on was in fact correct by definition since it satisfied its tests. It just didn't do what the article author figured it should do. The "mutation" is just a relatively cumbersome way to think through strengthening the specification. It's not clear to me that it's more productive to identify gaps in an implicit specification by breaking one's implementation rather than strengthening the tests, but I wouldn't be surprised if I have done so in some cases where for whatever reason it struck me as more pragmatic.
>Inefficient software is deployed to millions of users and can cost a lot more time (and resources/energy).

Whose time/resources/energy? Not the software vendor's.

>most programmers are incompetent.

You can't afford the software written exclusively by very competent programmers, optimizing for efficiency/speed/energy usage instead of development time. That'll usually cost you far more than more compute resources/time in the end.
> We know when we're conscious and unconscious.

I claim that this is not true as stated. The main bulk of the habit-forming nearly everyone needs to do when learning to lucid dream is to recognise when you're dreaming, because almost nobody natively knows when they're dreaming. You have to learn to spot it by paying attention to the things which the dream machinery is very bad at (like text, clocks, and your own breathing).
> in the hope that my work can be useful to other people and make quantified self easier for them

Careful, you risk making a mistake driven by "warm-fuzzy-feelings"!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26045256

Anything you do, do it only for yourself.
I wouldn't have expected that the CW to tighten things convention was linked to right/lefthandedness. Especially since many people seem to not have a notion about the convention.

But maybe that's my right privilege talking.
Yes you wouldn’t use Dr or Prof in normal speech in person in the UK either - that’d be very dorky.
Send to Friend FAQ – Pocket Support
Allright, I didn't really come up with anything clever. I may have been to sloppy in the original function/restriction. Obviously once you start passing non-numbers, all bets are off. E.g. a simple add({a: "hello", b: "world"}) breaks. Add may well have been intended as a string concatination function so yeah, fair enough.

A tricky thing I could see without ever explicitly defining "multiplier" (e.g. on the object prototype) is passing a Proxy that e.g. has a fallback for all missing properties. Detecting a proxy is only kind of possible (?) but we can copy all the original target properties from it, which should make it safe.

So here goes, my safe solution for modifying function signature in a non breaking way:

function add({ ...args }) {
const { a, b, ...rest } = args;
if (typeof a !== "number" || typeof b !== "number") {
throw "all arguments must be numbers";
}
if (Object.keys(rest).length > 0) {
throw "You may only pass arguments a and b";
}
return a + b;
}

function _add({ ...args }) {
const { a, b, multiplier = 1, ...rest } = args;
if (
typeof a !== "number" ||
typeof b !== "number" ||
typeof multiplier !== "number"
) {
throw "all arguments must be numbers";
}
if (Object.keys(rest).length > 0) {
throw "You may only pass arguments a, b and multiplier";
}
return a + b * multiplier;
}

Most of these issues (not the proxy one) should be solved by typescript.
There’s a lot of professions that desperately want to be seen as medical doctors, but they lack the training and education to do so. A lot of healthcare licensure is built around that ideal, but if you give someone an exclusive scope of practice, with lots of fancy titles, through a little mirror action they could make themselves appear as doctors. Probably the worst of this is the registered dietitians.
The term "callback" is usually used to refer to a function that you want called after the completion of an async operation (like a database read, a file read, a network call, etc).

This article uses the term callback but then uses functions passed to "map" as its examples; "map" is synchronous and so this usage of the term "callback" is atypical, probably atypical to the point that we can just say it's incorrect :).
I forgot to link it.

https://twitter.com/qutens_/status/1357496129659707392
Salasar Balaji Darshan Online Booking
site is on https://karnatakastateopenuniversity.in/salasar-balaji-darshan-online-booking.html
The Brexit example is quite good I think, as it illustrates the horse-trading inherent in these things. It was a promise to a wing of the Tory party in exchange for concessions on other issues. From the polls I can remember it wasn't something the vast majority cared about, it consistently came very far down the list of important issues facing the UK. But when the promise was activated, those with political power who were opposed to EU membership managed to make it into an issue, and I think drugs are an area of policy where it is easy to do the same thing, to create and energise a base that had no great feelings either way. It helps enormously that drugs are a taboo subject, and that usage is associated with groups of people that are easily painted as undesirables.
It doesn't really matter who engages in disinformation for it to be exactly that.

But with honor now totally absent from politics (being factually wrong or lying knowingly is no longer a reason to fall one ones' sword) we will need some other mechanism to deal with this, especially because the cost of spreading disinformation has gone down tremendously. It's a bit like spam: when it cost 50 cents to get your spam in front of an audience you made sure it landed as targeted as possible. But with the cost approaching zero you can afford to spread it in bulk and indiscriminately all day long.
Best bootcamps and programs to learn Machine Learning and Data Science
EVs Force Carmakers to Reinvent the Wheel, and Brakes, and Mirrors
I wonder whether a bill at the federal level could stop this or if it’d have to be an amendment.
join salasar darshan on official site https://karnatakastateopenuniversity.in/salasar-balaji-darsh...
How the Vision Transformer (ViT) works in 10 minutes
A cursory scan of their twitter account shows that it's the latter.
Every senior engineer who joined a startup before me. It can take a while to disabuse them of this.
A few things:

1. This isn’t a “student astronomer” this is a full on doctoral candidate researcher. Give her the authority she deserves.

2. This isn’t dark matter/energy. This is baryonic matter that is really hard to detect. Nor is it all of the missing matter, it’s just a smaller piece of it, proving that our current estimate of baryonic matter _may_ be inaccurate if we can find more of this stuff than we accounted for.

2. This is a really cool method! We’ve known for a long time that our atmosphere has a significant effect on light coming though it. It’s a great idea to extend that to find a sort of “extra-atmosphere”/gas floating around in space.

I’m excited to sit down and read this through to see their methodology. My only worry right now is: a straight line of gas is a little too perfect? Couldn’t this be more than a line, and possibly a more standard cloud (like other existing structures we know about). I ask because stars are pin points and if you’re getting data telling you it’s a line in the X axis, for example, you’ll also need data in the Y axis to prove that it’s not taller.

Really hope we can extend this to find more undetectable matter and get our equations in check.
One explanation could be the following based on the supposition that one starts with rectangular pieces of metal. To minimize waste for a circle one begins with a square piece and cuts out the maximum circle contained therein. The waste is (area of square) - (area of circle). If the circle was to be 4 inches in diameter (2 inch radius) cut from a 4-by-4 square the waste is 4^2 - Pi2^2 = 3.43, whereas a 2 inch diameter circle cut from a 2-by-2 square has waste of 2^2 - Pi1^2 = 0.86. The cylindrical side needed to achieve a given volume is rectangular so has no waste in either case.
Many people, who would ordinarily understand the logic of your comment, simply turn off the rational part of their brains when engaging in political content.

And so they are rendered immune to logic-based arguments.
Well, we certainly hope they’re decent candidates. ;)

But to the point of your question, no. It’s Boston-area typical entry-level SWE, whether self-taught, boot-camp, or college grad. We’re not even top-15 CS program competitive at that rate.
Hack for Social Media
As an academic, this is exactly the kind of tool that is perfect for teaching and making exam questions with the minimum of fuss. Thank you for doing it, and thank HN for bringing it to my attention!
The Theory Behind Latent Variable Models: Formulating a Variational Autoencoder
Show HN: Topic Based Stranger Chat Moderated Algorithmically-Live This Afternoon
catch me on here https://karnatakastateopenuniversity.in/reet-admit-card.html
We have this in Germany in pretty much every gas station: I never sit down for a coffee there if I can avoid it. The atmosphere of looking at gas pumps and lorries while slurping my coffee just doesn't cut it for me.
> Failure to follow social distancing regulations, stay-at-home orders, and mask mandates have been held up by media and elected officials alike as the chief cause of the pandemic’s persistence, and “anti-maskers” have been demonized as convenient scapegoats for colossal bureaucratic failures.

This is pretty rich in an article about misinformation. If people had worn masks, we would have better outcomes. If we had locked down, it would have been over already. Full stop. How is this confusing?

> Similarly, censorship of election fraud claims are well-documented, with President Donald Trump, along with a host of other conservatives, being censored for “promoting disinformation.”

Pathetic. It talks about how the Coronavirus response was bungled, tries to pat dipshits who refuse to wear masks on the back, and the only mention of Trump (7 times) have nothing to do with his oafish incompetence regarding the Coronavirus response, and have to do with election fraud. Amazing. I wonder if the author has any political agenda?
It's all historical convention.

My personal feeling is that it's perfectly understandable to highlight relevant research doctorates in a research/academic setting. Yes, it's a status thing but it's understandable. Otherwise? Eh. Why PhDs and certain other "doctorates" and not Masters and other post-undergraduate degrees that may (or may not) also involve substantial original research?
Though probably not what the article was referring to, Nevada is a bit of a special case here because in the past they created a county (Bullfrog County) for the express purpose of preventing the federal government from storing nuclear waste at the Yucca Mountain site. Ironically, what Nevada is proposing to do might actually make it easier for the federal government to store nuclear waste in Nevada as long as it was contracted to one of these new company counties, though the specific details of the legislation would need to be reviewed to know for sure.
Its a good idea to move the road because its proximity to Stonehenge is onerous and disrupting. Its a bad idea to make a tunnel because, there's lots of buried stuff near a site as ancient as Stonehenge. Its inevitable because Britain has limited land area and growing population and infrastructure.

Have I left anything out?
I’m not sure if this is a disagreement, but I don’t think redemption has anything to do with it. It’s about power and persecution. A lot of cancel culture, in fact I would say all of it, it’s about exerting power and making someone else do something. So long as a group is rewarded for their behavior (outrage, condemnation, demands for cancellation) it will continue.
"
...

You load 16 tons, what do you get?

Another day older and deeper in debt

St. Peter don't you call me, 'cause I can't go

I owe my soul to the company store ..."
Don’t you think there’s a difference between people making decisions based on propaganda and a system designed to subsidize certain outcomes and the people who setup that system and produced that propaganda because it was profitable?

In much of the world, fossil fuel usage has been heavily subsidized and alternatives actively opposed. I would not blame anyone who bought the car their society made necessary anywhere near as much as the people who saw a problem and prevented it being addressed at far less cost than it will now take. When Exxon first learned global warming was happening, it was the 1970s – a carbon tax, renewable fuels, transit investments, etc. would have been so much cheaper back then – but not for them, so they heavily funded efforts to make the topic political, told everyone it wasn’t real and you shouldn’t feel a need to buy a fuel efficient vehicle, and successfully stymied action for half a century.

I mean, the average SUV sold now gets much worse mileage than the car my dad bought to commute in the 80s - simply staying on that curve would have bought us a decade or two.
What many hardcore testing advocates don't want to accept is their tests will always be inadequate. I've found that bringing up mutation testing or bebugging tends to draw dirty looks from such people.

The last 100% test coverage advocate I mentioned it to said it would be a waste of developer effort. I assume they feel that effort would be better spent writing more tests.
id = x => x;

logging_id = x => { log(x); return x };
Sorry, I meant 'we' as an observer. Should have said "its clear from observation " perhaps.

Anyway good point.
> The minor debate over Lady Dr. Jill Biden’s title, which came up shortly after her husband’s election, may seem completely ridiculous and insulting, which it is, but it’s also the latest in a line of kerfuffles relating to how people in power in the United States present themselves

"Ridiculous and insulting?", not really. There's a long history of people mocking "Ed.D" holders calling themselves "Dr." outside of specific contexts. (Like on a paper or publication that's related to your field, etc.) And an Ed.D. is not a Ph.D. You don't see people with JD degrees calling themselves "Doctor" or even using the term "Esquire" outside of specific contexts, like on an article of incorporation for their Professional Corporation. etc.

You may see the actual degree indicated (Ph.D, Ed. D) after a name on a professional paper, etc. But not the term "Dr."

For an example take, see this blog posting from 2017, before anyone was thinking of First Lady Biden or her title: https://headinthesandblog.org/2017/06/ed-d-school-leaders-de.... Also see Wikipedia on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Education#Comparison...

And this article negates its own point in its conclusion! It says "lawyers can use the term Esquire, but not many do." Michelle Obama, by all accounts a competent attorney, never demanded to be called "Lady Dr. Michelle Obama, Esquire" even though with her J.D. and admission to the bar it would be logical. She would have been mocked the same way Jill Biden was.
The JD is a three-year degree that is the first one earned in a subject. If that sounds like a bachelor's degree, it's because it really is: It used to be called an LLB or Bachelor of Laws. But law schools renamed it in a misguided attempt to increase the prestige of the legal profession. The only pretense it has to being called a graduate degree is that law schools require usually another bachelor's degree in a different subject. It's still a second bachelor's degree.

In short, the JD is a "doctorate" in name only. The legal community, for the most part, is wise enough not to push the matter.
"Marsh vs Alabama" is apparently often cited as precedent for some of the concerns with a company town.
Serious question: Are the off-duty police allowed to do anything if a "small" crime happens? Or is this for security theatre only?
I mean, if I steal a 4TB SSD, it's unlikely there's going to be a prosecution right? So are they going to risk the career damage of brutalizing me when I resist, or knocking out some teeth tackling me if I decide to run?
I think the way to do it is to cut one end of, then the other and use it to push the paste out through the can. Doing that I've never had a problem.
CUA – A consistent and usable human-computer interface for the SAA environments [pdf]
The Next Cyberattack Is Already Underway
Geospatial data helps to better understand Parkinson's disease
It’s very difficult to tell what environment ‘typical’ aliens evolve in. It seems like Earth is probably a very unusual planet, mainly due to our very large moon which has stripped away so much of our atmosphere. Most planets our size will have atmospheres much more like that of Venus in terms of density at least. Smaller planets might develop atmospheres like ours in terms of density, as Mars did, but won’t be able to retain them for long.

Even a modest increase in Earths gravity, or significantly denser atmosphere would make reaching orbit unviable. I also don’t see how life evolving in liquid voids on outer planet moons, or similar environments, could develop much beyond simple invertebrates or equivalent.

I’m really despairing that spacefaring civilisations are at all likely. Life yes, I think it’s likely to be reasonably common at the galactic level. Intelligent life, sure. But I think we’re fantastically lucky to be in the situation we find ourselves. I know statistics says we’re supposed to most likely be typical, but random chance doesn’t care about how many possibilities didn’t show up. If a lottery has a winner, that ticket won just as much no matter if there were 10 losers or a billion of them.
No there’s not. This is all about class signaling.
It's a legal requirement in some EU countries to have a valid imprint with address and owner information.

People getting mail from lawyers, demanding an imprint, is not unheard of.
We've had the worst of both worlds: the death toll is worse than Sweden, because the "lockdown" was so porous with so many exempt employers, so many people have been spreading it at work and school. But nonetheless we have the cost of lockdown.
It is very easy to write code that “works on my machine” or “works in QA” and then fails when it hits production volumes or a requirement changes to add more users/elements.

Then it often becomes prohibitively expensive to just throw more servers/VMs at it.

And often the “expensive” engineer changing a nested loop into a map lookup can save years of compute time in a matter of hours.

Unfortunately all too often that only happens after scaling up/out without understanding why systems are slow.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not arguing for needless early optimisation but an inefficient query/algorithm can waste a lot of computing resources...
Thank you! I am glad you liked my blog. :)
Kind of the opposite of 'expansion'. That's essentially 'demolition'. Not going to be anything worth expanding into, after that. Like blowing up a safe generally incinerates the money inside.
That's exactly ray tracing in original and all-purpose meaning and sense what this is about.
https://abovethelaw.com/2020/11/lawyers-calling-themselves-d...

“We’ve long taken the stance that, despite the technicality that a “J.D.” has the word “doctor” in it, lawyers who adopt the honorific are, well, jackasses.”
I certainly agree with you. I've no college degree and I'm making a good living.

I just didn't think the parent poster was saying otherwise.
Have you ever faced a problem or system so complex, that you tried to understand and gave up in frustration? Do you think there are systems out there completely beyond humanity grasp? that we won't even have an entry point to reason about them?
I had to Google, and I think this is what is meant with "Torvald's C++ response": http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/c++/linus
The cyberpunk genre was meant as warning not a template.
This is a false dichotomy. It’s easier to make code faster if it is readable and maintainable.

The slowest code I’ve encountered was also unreadable and unmaintainable (otherwise someone would have already fixed the obvious performance issues).
Here some possible paths for you from the Senior Dev role:

Individual Contributor:

=> Lead or Principal Engineer => Staff Engineer

=> Architect => Senior Architect

=> Site Reliability Engineer => Senior Site Reliability Engineer => etc.

Management:

=> Engineering Manager => Senior Engineering Manager => Tech Director => etc.

Process:

=> Technical Program Manager => Senior Program Product Manager => etc.

=> Developer Advocate

Business:

=> Product Manager => Senior Product Manager => etc.

=> CTO at a startup (team of 10 or less)

Any time a Senior Dev comes to me saying they want to grow, I asked them a very simple question: what do you really want?

It's a simple question, but the majority of them can't answer it. They don't know what they want. They just see colleagues get promoted left and right and have FOMO, so they panic and think "I have to push to be promoted too, let's become a Principal or Architect!"

So first, it's about helping them figure out what they want: is it more autonomy, or a larger scope, or weight in the decision making process, or owning a full tech scope in a small environment, etc.?

Once you know what they want, then you can plan what positions they can start targeting, and from there you can identify which skills they have to improve and which projects they have to get involved in to build credibility and get hired for it.

From my experience, the skills they have to develop end up being the same regardless of the job targeted: interpersonal communication, politics, business acumen, negotiating, public speaking, and so on.
"After" can certainly imply causality but that is not necessarily the case and, from context, we can see it was clearly not the author's intent.