skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My understanding is that we cannot scale that to meet our electricity needs, and we need to keep the lights on when it is dark outside. Due to this, solar isn't good enough. ( Though should certainly be part of the plan. )

I could be wrong though, I'm not an expert.
> Get a second income stream within the app.

We are suppose not to be mean in the comments, but that part looks like some kind of scam. Can you explain what it means?
T cell selection prevents autoimmune disease, has been reconstituted in-silico
Author here: Because T cell receptors (TCRs) that recognize antigens can drive cytotoxic and other T cell responses, autoreactive TCRs that recognize autoantigens can drive the destruction of healthy cells and tissues with those autoantigens. Autoreactive TCRs are removed by T cell receptor selection, which protects against autoimmune diseases. We combined high-throughput TCR sequencing and machine learning to identify which TCRs are removed by T cell selection. Our trained machine learning models may therefore be able to identify autoreactive TCRs that can drive the destruction of healthy cells and tissues.

Open-access link: https://rdcu.be/cmt4E
Limit access to only those servers.
Probably, but Scott Alexander writes on the latter two things so realizing this is nothing but a curiosity. Dearest Claxton is also an anagram and as it so happens dearestclaxton.substack.com is not written by Scott Alexander. Or anyone really.
Sorry, I'm not qualified to answer the question. You will have to ask someone who has seen Kafka being used in a place where it made sense...
For a big enough company, you can collect a few data points via Glassdoor[0], levels.fyi, etc to make sure that they pay in the range you're looking for before you even begin the interview process. For smaller companies, you're absolutely right, although I personally tend to give a very broad range[0] at the beginning of the process, and only narrow that down at the offer stage. That's worked well for me in the past.

The nice thing about the explosion of remote work due to COVID is that engineering salaries are beginning to normalize across the US, and there is now a lot more salary data available online, so it's easier than ever to see what you're "worth" on the market on average. This at least gives you an anchor when having these conversations, so you're not going in blind, and gives you a lot more leverage if they low-ball you.

[0]: Yes, I'm aware of the drawbacks of self-reported data, but it's still broadly useful in aggregate.

[1]: I'm making up numbers, but something like $120k - $200k, with the lower number being the minimum you'd realistically take. Usually recruiters are honest up front if they can't even afford your absolute minimum, but it still leaves you with a lot of negotiation room once the offer comes in.
No, but we could start making them pay more for their airline tickets.
> hobbyist without a CS degree has an even bigger uphill battle

This was me when I tried Triplebyte. I wish it had worked out. I don't really blame TB for the failure, but I think there was a lot of optimism on the part of TB that wasn't shared by the companies I interviewed with. TB was just another placement option for every one of them, and I found it challenging to overcome what felt like walking into several onsite interviews completely blind to what was expected of me.
Wherever you have a firehose of data that needs to be processed.

I've heard of it being used as a sort of message queue for application level events before, but that sounds like a nightmare of trying to reinvent the actor model with 1000x the complexity.
To be fair, bugs are highly correlated with line count, and all code is inscrutable in the absence of knowledge.

I do like vocabulary-based metrics for legibility/difficulty; Halstead metrics can't tell you how good a piece of code is, but they can tell you how difficult it is for others to read, empirically.

The old 7 +- 2 rule applies, if you are using more than 9 functions/methods and arguments, the vocabulary of a function is difficult.

f compose g is 0.5. It has 3 elements. It's not hard to understand.

def compose (f: B=> C, g: A => B): A => C = x => f(g(x))

Is 2.5, counting all the definition parts and type level stuff. It has 14 distinct elements. If you don't know the pieces, it's really difficult to read if you don't know any of the parts. If your language doesn't care about types,

def compose(f, g) = (x) => f(g(x))

Comes to 2.1 by my count, but you have to look up fewer things at 7, so it's easy to read for new people.

Now, the types make it easier once you advance beyond a pure beginner- the constrain the function to only one possible implementation. But if you're totally unfamiliar with things, they make stuff unreadable. Even in tiny functions.
I'm referring to the Big Five personality trait. I thought it was common knowledge on HN.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreeableness

It doesn't seem controversial to say that if a survey is presented relatively apolitically, someone who scores higher on agreeableness is more likely to be willing to participate in it.
An ISP is only for governments to build
This is akin to totalling out a car for cosmetic damage - are you trying to fix it back to as it were (may be impossible or exceeding costly or risky) - or is it working to get it back to good enough?

And circumstances make this different - a sports star is going to want to do everything to improve performance, whereas an office worker may just want functionality.
The problem is that navigating all that in a public setting is compounded by the fact that it is public. When you make it public, for whatever reason, you must navigate not only your side as an individual and their side as an individual but the reactions of a large number of other people.

If they denied forgiveness in the first five minutes because they were hurt, many other people will reinforce their choice and actively make it difficult for them to sincerely change their mind.

At best, we can suggest that it should be socially acceptable to neither accept nor deny the apology and to not comment at all on the matter of forgiveness. But I think a public apology implicitly is a request for forgiveness and can be understood as such without a public request for forgiveness.

That's how I would handle it.

I used to write a lot of very sincere, public apologies on a small email list of a few hundred people because I was very ill and on a lot of medication and in a lot of pain and frequently not sleeping well. I certainly did not mean to offend anyone.

I wrote my apology. I explained what I had been trying to say if I felt it had been misinterpreted. I took responsibility for hurting them. I tried to write in a way that remedied that hurt.

The result was that I became the list scapegoat. If someone actively picked on me and I gave push back, then other people were all "There she goes again!"

I have probably more experience than average writing sincere and heartfelt public apologies. This is an informed opinion and it isn't going to change.

I always hated seeing on list apologies that ended with a request for forgiveness. They were consistently shitty behavior that boiled down to trying to save face and demand that the person they had wronged should make them feel okay about their sense of embarrassment. It was always an awful thing to witness.

Edited because autocorrect borked something.
I may have a few chips on my shoulder...
Thanks for this public service announcement to never go on lobsters. Wow.
Ffmpeg can run in any browser now… https://github.com/ffmpegwasm/ffmpeg.wasm

Maybe can package that up and monetize but… maybe hard to corner a market
Just because I used a word you think is offensive, doesn't mean you should insult me by insinuating that I've lost control of myself. Such an insinuation is more inherently insulting than any four-letter word.
Cost of testing is simple. Just launch the tests.

Regarding deprecating and moving away from Python 2, this has been discussed ad nauseam and the issues have been recognized around it. By the way, this wasn't a language issue, but an issue managing it.

Having said that, do you have any opinions or anything to discuss around the current plans?
I think limited scaling so far is one reason for that. With limited transaction space, only the high-value transactions are worth paying the gas fees, and mostly that's people trading stuff around looking for profit.

I'm hoping that when rollups and sharding get tx/sec into five figures, there will be more room for other sorts of applications.
> Similarly, the people with the largest student loan debt tend to be affluent.

I question this. I'd assume the largest student loan debts are held by the middle class, because the affluent didn't take out loans because they paid for their education with cash.
Causing? No. I never said that. Reducing? Yes. It's important if there's an underlying condition causing low T to not lower it even further. Excessive PUFS or omega-3 leads free T to be SHBG-bound. Albumin-bound and free are the only readily, universally bioavailable forms.

If you commit suicide, you throw away all future changes to a different state.
AI Researchers Create Looping Videos from Still Images
They have been stupid for a long time now.
I pretty much stopped adding new notes to Evernote back when they changed the web app.

It’s looking like I will have to write my own note app if I want something that does what I want and is going to last so I don’t loose my notes every decade.
Well, you should really include the story of Ping: https://www.amazon.com/review/R2VDKZ4X1F992Q :)
I think maybe someone like Donald Knuth would have been a better example.
Just curious, what do you think a better interview for a software engineer should look like?

People hate overly abstract/CS-focused whiteboard problems (mostly for good reason), isn't practical coding the obvious better alternative?
Depression and mental issues have a huge amount of stigma here in the USA. If I told my employer I wanted time off because I was depressed, there is an almost zero chance that I would get any meaningful support other than being allowed to use my limited PTO that I have accrued.

I do pay for both short and long term disability, but as far as I know, Long-term disability (LTD) insurers are generally reluctant to approve claims for benefits based on mental illnesses such as depression or bipolar disorder.

Additionally, I would have to deal with the newly acquired stigma of being "that depressed guy with mental issues".

Taking it even further, if someone admits that they have suicidal thoughts, this can easily result in having ALL of their rights completely stripped away. You can be forcibly hospitalized and medicated against your will, entirely on the word of someone else. You will also no longer ever be able to pass background checks, own a weapon, or be hired for many types of jobs.

I know all of this for a fact because it happened to my ex-wife, who developed schizophrenia in her early 20's (after we were already married) and became bi-polar and suicidal. After years of going in and out of the system and being put on countless medications, she ended up killing herself.

The USA really really really hates people who are mentally ill.
PUFAs
Oracle is a fancy name for an API, right?
Nod. Color is often taught starting in preK, and yet even first-tier physical-sciences graduate students, asked "What color is the Sun?", often answer with something like "it doesn't have a color" or "it's rainbow color", suggesting wide-spread deep misunderstanding of color. It seems teaching of color isn't going well.

So what might better look like? Phones/tablets are used preK on. Phones with multiple front cameras could permit a clip-on spectrometer to provide a simultaneous normal view for orientation, making it more accessible. UV and thermal IR cameras are increasingly inexpensive. Light engines for spectra synthesis regrettably seem less readily available? So what might a Kish-accessible spectrometer app look like? What might a spectra-centered preK-2 learning progression for color look like?

It seems at least vaguely plausible that color might thus be taught successfully. Imagine that were true, and gave you early-primary students with a firm grasp of color. How might that then be used, to teach other topics better? UV protection; warm clothes and insulation; Earth's thermal-management BBQ roll, cold clear nights and mountains and deserts, greenhouse gasses; ... ?

> refuse to believe something that explains a bunch of everyday phenomena

Integrated explanation of everyday phenomena does not seem a focus of current education. So perhaps refusal might reflect a lack of familiarity and comfort with such reasoning?
The impression i get is that you can write Russian in Roman text, and most Russians will understand you, but if you write English with Russian characters, very few people will understand you
Historians, Slaves of Fashion?
Some thoughts on the current state of Amiga
I'm unfamiliar with the use of in as a keyword in the following snippet from the OP. I can't find anything on Google about it, either. Can anyone tell me more about it?

while let Some(line_in) in parse_line(&reader).await? {
broadcast_line(line_in)?;
}
> If Python were focused on functional programming it would have a utility function for this similar to itertools.groupby (but with indices in an array instead of keys in a dictionary).

itertools.groupby doesn’t return a dictionary, it returns an iterator of (key, (iterator that produces values)) tuples. It sounds, though, like you want something like:

from itertools import groupby

def categorize_into_list(source, _range, key):
first = lambda x: x[0]
sublist_dict = {
k: list(v[1] for v in vs)
for k, vs in groupby(sorted(((key(v), v) for v in source), key=first), first))
}
return [sublist_dict.get(i, []) for i in _range]

Then you could do this with something like:

def congruent_sets(m, l):
categorize_into_list(l, m, lambda v: v % m)
whataboutism would be the original comment bringing up American torture when someone criticized Saudi torture
I got my understanding from the illustrated book...

OK. So I didn't get what Kafka is.
As long as command submission is only permitted (or considered valid) when the submitter ensures there is sufficient space in the completion ring for the replies, writing to the completion ring can't legitimately block, and the completion writer can assume this.

This asymmetry is because the command submitter is able to block and is in control. It even works with elastic ringbuffers that can be expanded as needed. All memory allocation can be on the command submitter side.

This trick works in other domains, not just kernels. For example request-reply ringbuffer pairs can be used to communicate with interrupt handlers, in OSes and also in bare metal embedded systems, and the interrupt handler does not need to block when writing to the reply ringbuffer. It's a nice way to queue things without locking issues on the interrupt side.

Similarly with signal handlers and attached devices (e.g. NVMe storage, GPUs, network cards), those can can always write to the reply ringbuffer too.
I was once accused of lying about my work experience by a $FORTUNE500 interviewer when I failed to articulate what a CSS flexbox was for a backend dev position.

Such an eye-opening experience! Now that I’m on the other side of the table these days, I understand the importance of making interviewees feel comfortable and asking questions that allow them to start off strong.
Nope, you're projecting and using a strawman. That's not the point. :)
That looks like an extremely impressive venue (‘…wavefield synthesis…’ etc.). I’d love to visit! Many years ago I saw a concert featuring acousmatic/spatialized music performed by Dr. Robert Dow (and some other people who I forget the names of) in Edinburgh that blew me away... I’m not sure what the set-up he was using was/whether he was using ambisonics/how he had maybe customized/expanded on that standard (as I remember he had what looked like home-made speaker ‘trees’ set up above the audience’s heads, alongside loads of more conventional speakers…), but it sounded great!
It depends on the country you're in. In the UK for example, you're only allowed to listen to broadcast, amateur radio, or transmissions to which you are the intended recipient
no, you’re wrong. it started working this way in iOS 11. You can look it up if you like
> I disagree with this point because most interviewers ... are novices

Having sat on hiring committees, that's a fair summary. Most people are not very good at interviewing, because it's a weird skill, and nobody actually teaches you how to do it well. There's interview training, but it's incredibly short, and seems like half of it is about legal policy. There's ostensibly shadow interviews, but that tends to be luck of the draw on who your shadower is; most won't put in the requisite time to help coach you in conducting better interviews.

I think big companies like to pretend that leetcode interviewing scales well, without actually doing the time necessary to make it scale well.

> Right now my interview has a wash out coding exercise that is beginner oriented to get the resume liars but other than that it's all systems.

This is 100% what I've gravitated to. The longer I've interviewed people, the easier and easier the actual coding parts of my questions have become.
Is it though? I checked my initial bias of assuming the rest of the blog would be well written after the author declared himself a skilled writer along with the accompanying validation of another person deeming so as well.

I was still a bit thrown off guard to come across "grammar" issues with certain phrases. Whatever the proper word is here I'm not sure, but there were some missing words, e.g "ran out steam", as well as weird terms like "iron practices".

But also, maybe my tendency to perform psychoanalysis and evaluate reaction to new information doesn't make me a better reviewer so much as a default critic.

Anyway I'm terrible with english and probably dyslexic. Just caught up in how I read that thing & my ongoing reaction to it. think too much... Just a blog....

Edit: oh yea, forgot to mention that the lead up and cliff hanger type ending threw me off without an "ah-ha" or laugh
https://archive.is/h00Hs
Experts Doubt Ethical AI Design Will Be Broadly Adopted
Possibly some readers are tired of the repetition, and they're not wrong [1] - that's why we downweight follow-up stories [2]. However, we make exceptions when there's significant new information (SNI) [3], which basically amounts to: is there enough of a diff from the previous thread to support a substantially new discussion? Diffs are what's interesting [4].

In this case you could call it either way: the fact that Felleisen apologized is significant new information but on the other hand the thread is...of the second freshness. I've turned off the flags for now.

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

[4] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
I can send this bug report into your regular notion support email.

But I'm on Android 11 on a Motorola hyper one with the default Gboard in English. I just downloaded notion today and my OS has no pending updates.

I can repro 100% of the time.

- [ ] my to-do item$

- [ ] my to-do item $

In the above two examples, if I press enter when my cursor is at the end of the line (indicated by the dollar sign), the top example does the wrong thing. The bottom example works fine.
The undecidability of a specific formulation of the halting problem is practically irrelevant, but you should never take published results too literally. If the halting problem is undecidable in one formalism, it is also undecidable in many other formalisms, and so is a wide class of other problems that can be reduced to the halting problem.

Rice's theorem is one immediate consequence of the undecidability of the halting problem. It effectively states that if you are writing code that analyzes (certain external behavior of) other code, there will always be edge cases your code cannot handle. It is useful to understand that the perfect algorithm is not out there, just waiting to be discovered. Instead of searching for it, you should start thinking about the trade-offs between resource usage and the ability to handle increasingly rare edge cases.

I'm not a fan of resource-bounded variants of decision problems, because the standard complexity classes are ugly beasts. Reasoning about them is so difficult that many fundamental problems remain unsolved. And even if you manage to prove something, the excessive use of quantifiers means that you only learn something about the worst-case behavior with some arbitrarily large inputs.

The resource-bounded problems also miss the point. Impossibility results are not really about the impossibility of proving something with realistic or unrealistic resources. The proof ideas are often more important than the results. One idea is particularly simple: if you have already written your code, I can write an input that fools it.
All the people who are mad about web tracking violating their privacy should spend 95% of their privacy activism on Amazon.

They're building a terrifyingly thorough, 1984-like surveillance network and actively pursuing govt contracts to use it for law enforcement.

If you want to create a weapon that could be used to control a populace quickly, it would look a lot more like this (and autonomous drones) than it would a human army.
Especially when they're probably making on average less than $25k per engineer they place. I can't imagine they're making even close to $100k on average.

$25k*10k = $25M / 10 years = $2.5M / year. That is peanuts compared to how many people they employ. Plus the ads they run...
> I get real-world interview practice, and that always helps me in future interviews.

I hear this a lot, but how much interview practice do you really need? After the third or fourth set of interviews, they start to really blur together for me.

None of your points are false, but if you're casting a wide net and taking every interview without any idea if the company can even afford you, that's a lot of hours spent. The last time I looked for a job, I interviewed at only four companies and spent an average of probably 5-6 hours on each, and it was exhausting. I can't imagine making a habit out of it while also working full-time.
Have you tried getting locks that only release the key when locked? If you've got the key in your pocket then the door is locked. More time efficient than taking a photo every day.
Between 2010 and 2019 the UK added 10GW of onshore wind generating capacity, 8.5GW of offshore wind generating capacity, roughly 13GW of solar capacity, and 0 nuclear plants.

The UK has not brought a new (commercial/public power) nuclear reactor online since the nineties, or finished building a completely new site since the eighties.

It has started building one, which is over budget and delayed and has been described as “the most expensive power station in the world”.

It has had three recent plans cancelled, four more go nowhere in years, had two developers (EON and nPower) pull out of UK nuclear, and the Scottish parliament had backed no new nuclear plants in Scotland.

If nuclear is our saviour, it’s not looking very likely that we’ll be saved.
"I'm making up numbers, but something like $120k - $200k, with the lower number being the minimum you'd realistically take. Usually recruiters are honest up front if they can't even afford your absolute minimum, but it still leaves you with a lot of negotiation room once the offer comes in."

Why even give an upper limit? It's not like you'd refuse $400k if it was offered to you, would you?

Most companies will naturally start negotiation near the lower end of your range, even if they would have started way higher had you let them make the offer first. I really don't see an upside to this strategy.