skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yeah takes a lot to make a generated sdk good, lots of bad examples, few good ones.

AWS SDKs must be generated and they are mostly good but some of them like S3 are so heavily used they could have teams writing them no probs. GCPs are (or were?) super verbose which is a GRPC generation artifact, same as openapi.
A relative of my lives in a three story apartment building with an underground parking structure. He had purchased a bolt w/ a recharging station. After the last batch of fire hazard safety notices, he sold the Bolt and bought something else. With this notice, I think he'd have had to park the car outside the city limits to stay at least 50 feet from another car, and I'm not sure how he'd have handled charging.
Hello fellow italian citizen :D
Yeah in general any extension should go in its own schema.
> pay me fairly and I'll treat you fairly

This might work for you, but I wouldn't hire someone who said that. It translates to "I'll only be honest if you are honest." I like to think that peoples' honor is not contingent on their estimation of the honor of their colleagues.

My dad told me that the difference between men and animals is men have honor. We each get to choose which we are.
That’s a little naive. No political entity in history has been able to reverse economic decline by looking at what it did best in an earlier age and try to do that again.

There are other countries that are simply better than the US at doing certain things. I don’t understand why Americans can’t just accept that. Embrace the things we’re really good at, work with others to get from them the things they’re good at.
Bill Gates pumps millions into Dutch web super Picnic
It depends on the offer. Remember that recent piece of news?

> Newly-released emails reveal how Google hoped to pay $50 million for YouTube in 2006, and why it ended up paying $1.65 billion

> https://www.businessinsider.com/email-reveal-google-hoped-bu...
>The normal tech interview questions about sorting or recursion or whatever are not supposed to be business-relevant questions, they are to filter out people who simply can't program.

It's perfectly possible to be a 10x engineer but not being able to solve some obscure recursion problem on a whiteboard. All it does is forcing candidates to study obscure problems before the interview and hope they get lucky and receive a problem that they have memorized so they can pretend to have never seen it.
I agree with your general sentiment and I think algorithmic questions are fine. But it seems to me that the common type of questions are very non-typical for every day problem solving and programming.

For example I as a full stack web dev, never write sorting, very rarely search / string or scheduling and so on. However I happen to like puzzles and coding challenges, so I do them fairly regularly on a Sunday. Do people want to select based on hobbies?

Actually tricky stuff (tricky as in I have to think more deeply and do actual design) I have to do includes for example:

- caching and synchronization

- concurrency/asynchronicity issues

- deep SQL queries

- schema (DB/API/UI) design

- tree/graph traversal

- refactoring and code design

- breaking down (deeply coupled or complex) features into sensible tasks

- (declarative) state machines

- asking the right questions about an unfamiliar domain and deriving the right abstractions and data structures

- error handling, invariants, correctness...

Those apparently rarely come up in the types of questions that for example leetcode et al suggest. It's typically "A&D with a twist".
I don't expect any effects of this in the US. After all, Amazon had these agreements, treating workers as retail employees, in France for years.
I honestly have no idea what you think I believe, but it doesn't appear to be connected to what I'm saying.
>> My anecdotal experience is that you never want people who can't write a for-loop or whatever in your team
> Yes, you don't. But you don't need to ask them that directly, or have them code live.

How will you know if you don't ask them a question that asks them to solve a small-scale problem that can be solved via a for loop? In our process it takes like 10 minutes. Granted we don't ask fizz buzz, but also we don't ask for implementations of textbook algorithm. Just a simple programming problem or two.

The way I see it is, the most condescending interview for a programmer is the one that contains no coding at all. And if you refuse to implement FizzBuzz, well, that is okay, but I will not recommend you for being hired.
I have a friend who works in big tech. We worked together before. I moved to a new gig where I work fewer hours and earn a lot less money but I have a huge amount of freedom. From our conversations I gather that he would love to do what I am doing, but he has a house payment and a wife and kids. It seems like people get comfortable for a while with their big tech gig, and then get real used to the cash flow. After a while they can’t make a change because they’re so embedded.
Well, of course if you start with a problem in Galois Theory (as the author of the OP does), it is very likely that Category Theory might enlighten you. In the end, it was built for those problems.

However, go and try to explain Bolzano's Theorem or the midpoint rule using that framework.
There is another thread on the front page about every engineer having to try out consulting.

This is one of the ways to learn how to use language that business gets the point across.
> around the Vista time

I remember stumbling on the win 3.11 sources on github at some point, C++ was already used back then
Obviously the manufacturer should compensate its customers, it's just better to have an EV with worse range than an unsafe EV or even a pile of scrap (if they all got recalled and probablt not fixed).
The risk for a shoddy car is that you end up killing someone or get written up and charged with a violation. The risk for shoddy software (in most cases) is that you have an outage and suffer some financial or reputation damage, but that won't put you out of business.

There's laws against bad cars, there's no laws against bad software.
> Without having already done the classes you did, it would be very difficult to motivate category theory and it's liable to just make students' eyes glaze over.

There's enough motivation for category theory even in basic foundations. You could start by teaching a structural set theory like ETCS as the formal counterpart of naïve set theory. Then yes, teach abstract algebra as usual but introduce category-theoretical generalizations early instead of duplicating content.
I mean there's been a few successful companies like Slack that started off with something completely different before they pivoted. Sometimes market fit takes some experimentation.
This is very cool!
What is the SQL engine under?
I wish to god news publications still employed editors - the article is almost unreadable.

Anyway, search for "Roth IRA" to read considerable detail about the issues Thiel faces in his clever use of it using a follow-on grant of Paypal stock.
>If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.

—Herbert Stein, economist
These "why X is hard" articles seem to be based heavily on one's experience. My immediate thought about authorization's complexities was that the rules tend to be poorly defined and changing: users usually want to have full access to everything, non-users tend to restrict them too much, and then there are some odd exceptions like users being between roles, or belonging to a role but with some exceptions.

This article lists complexity of enforcement, mentioning that it's done in many places. That's not quite my experience: it's indeed hard to do and easy to mess up doing that way. Given that most of the projects where authorization is needed are about database access/interfaces, a DBMS itself is a good candidate for security policy enforcement in a single place.

The next point is decision architecture, talking about lack of database access when an authorization-related decision needs to be made, but it won't arise with authorization happening in the database. The article mentions that it becomes a problem if you try to use authorization in multiple microservices or something like that, but pretty sure that in most cases it is unnecessary.

The last point, modelling, is the closest to how I'd answer the title question. Oso claims to solve it by introducing a declarative policy language, which is what DBMSes provide too; PostgreSQL, for instance, even allows rather advanced (arbitrary SQL queries) programming of policies (via row security policies). Still doesn't quite solve the issue of requirements being a vague and changing mess.

For the first two points, I'd rather call it "how to make authorization hard".

Edit: To be fair, the third problem is man-made too, and could be avoided; it's just rarely under the programmer's control, unlike the other two.
Thank you for this link, I wasnt aware of that... building kernel just as I type :)
Here's the link to the $20k consensus challenge that was announced towards the end of the episode:

https://github.com/coilhq/viewstamped-replication-made-famou...
> Asking for interoperable batteries between vehicle brands is like asking for interoperable engines between vehicle brands, it's ridiculous.

Engines are interoperable to a large degree; you can switch out the engine+ecu of your car for the engine+ecu of another car more easily than you'd think because the majority of the effort will be in changes requiring an adapter plate and shaft for the transmission.

There are hurdles that make it harder (for example, auto transmissions have software that expects a particular set of engine characteristics), but by and large most engines are isolated enough from the rest of the car and the drivetrain that you don't need to worry.
For what would be "userspace" yes, but they were crazy enough to still do COM in C, given that by Windows 95 C++ was still unwelcomed on the kernel.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20210824-00/?p=10...
TBH I really really hate having to do driver updates on windows, vs linux which JustWorksTM
There's a general expectation that if you own a house, even a single or duplex house, it's not going to fall apart and put lives at risk with a moderate storm or kitchen fire.

I'd agree with you that there is a lot of unnecessary and unproductive bureaucracy in the process, but I do not mind the status quo.
> tech and service companies which form an ever larger share of the economy aren't hit by supply chain issues at all

They actually are: try buying eg. recent AMD chips in bulk, some models of laptops, GPUs... even home office gear like webcams and printers were in short supply last year, although this seems to have largely sorted itself out.

But agreed, these are rarely showstoppers and you can usually work around them.
This is explicitly the language for not learning things we've figured out over the last decades so ... no ;-)
> The problem with hardware is you can’t always just patch fault.

That is the part that is "next level negligence". If you're making "security products" and you are not able to cover basic security - i.e. have a working update process and communicate to your customers that they should actually use that working update process and not actively disable it - then you failed at your job.
Different people mean different things by it, but often/increasingly/safest assumption is that someone just means 'temporary contract work'. Which you can absolutely do as a new graduate, since 'need some fixed term/scope work' doesn't necessarily mean 'need some senior expertise' - it just means cash-strapped, or sudden need to scale out that isn't expected (or known) to last.
https://www.softether.org/ it's not that hard to set up your own VPN.
(The already high) GPU prices skyrocketed from December to about May, then plateaued and even slipped a little because 1. crypto prices fell 2. supply improved (obviously connected to 1) and 3. new Nvidia cards implemented LHR to discourage mining. Recently crypto prices have risen again, and card prices have followed. What I'm saying is: You missed your chance, relatively speaking.
Modern cpus do much more work than needed when executing code (branch prediction and speculative execution).
Unfortunately I suspect it'll never be cheaper to build.
My reading of this was: dump it in a pond, manage the oxygen levels, and algea will basically out compete everything.

I assume that they need to seed it with the right version, to stop it becoming a stagnant oxygen free environment.
so work on upwork for $15/hour?
Sure. A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors.
I'm saying they are very confident and happy to host actual fascists and other stripes of neo-nazis and white supremacists. I have no clue about their own personal opinions, although some people further down this thread suggested they had such affiliations.

Providing material support to people is never neutral. I'm happy some sysadmins and community managers are taking a stand against abuse and harassment. On the other hand i'm also concerned State-mandated censorship is detrimental to human rights and will in fact be used more (as it already is) against anarchists, queers and other minorities and not against actual fascists because our governments are much closer to the historical definitions of "fascism" than they'd like to admit. So i'm clearly against censorship, but i agree with XKCD that kicking assholes out of our communities is not a "free speech" issue: https://xkcd.com/1357/

I can't say i'm very comfortable with these "free speech" hosts who would certainly turn away any opinions they disagree with. I much prefer radical servers like riseup/autistici who have clear policies on where they stand politically and what kind of activities they're ready to fight for and what kind of activities they'll fight off.

Contrary to Protonmail and their millions of dollars, Riseup is a self-organized non-profit (born of the altermondialist/internationalist movement) who had servers seized rather than rat on their users [0]... unless some people/activities directly contradict their ethical principles in which case they reserve the right to collaborate with law enforcement [1] instead of risking the infrastructure needed by all their users (as in a seppuku pledge, like Lavabit did).

[0] https://riseup.net/en/about-us/press/fbi-seizes-anonymous-re...
[1] https://riseup.net/en/about-us/policy/government-faq#what-ab...
> Why does the USA, The Land of the Free and The Land of Opportunity, have so much bureaucracy? Look, I know fire codes are important, and you don't want a building to crumble in around you, but...

Yep, we should leave that to the market. You happen to live in a building that collapses, well, then you can have The Choice(TM) to never inhabit a building made by the same company again (if you're lucky). Eventually they'll be driven out of the market, unless people choose to risk it after assessing all available information, in which case there's nothing we can really do about it.
> > My anecdotal experience is that you never want people who can't write a for-loop or whatever in your team

> Yes, you don't. But you don't need to ask them that directly, or have them code live.

I am not being flippant, but why not? Asking seems to be the simplest way to know.

Also, you're making a strong assumption regarding the type of tech questions that OP is asking.
You go from fizzbuzz (probably described by the interviewer, not just "do a fizzbuzz") to a sorting algorithm from memory. That's clearly not the same.

My personal experience interviewing candidates is:

At the end of our first interview (discussing their work, projects, experience, what they are looking for in the next 1-2-3 years etc.) I ask a very simple coding question that should take 1 min to solve if they were by themselves, with no complex algorithm and requiring no prior knowledge beside the language they are using. Typically, a fizzbuzz.

To solve that 1 min question, they have 10-15min where they can ask for guidance, help, etc.
The goal is just to exclude people who just can't code. And surprisingly at least half of the candidates fail this.

Now maybe this is because our recruiters are not good enough, but this 10 min coding is super useful to prevent wasting more time on a candidate that is not a fit for us.
Get source to Debian packages only via dgit; “official” Git links are beartraps
This is nonsense. That's like saying 'everybody converging on a 4 wheel design'. The details of how the platform is built and integrated is still very different.

> Then the real truth that no one wants to hear, is that there is no need for so many different types of passenger vehicles.

Good that we have you to tell us what vehicles people should drive.
Someone I hire as an employee I want to have a good understanding of their capabilities, because - let's face it - letting someone go is not a good option esp. culturally in Germany (it would still be possible within first half year "Probezeit"). But I do prefer to hire someone that I am certain can contribute to the team for the next years.

As someone who interviews, I can say that while there is a correlation between CV and coding skills, you do find regularly that really simple coding problems cannot be solved by applicants (slightly above FizzBuzz complexity).

And for most applicants, there is no Github-Account.

So I think its only fair to have some coding problems that don't overdo it of course for permanent positions.

When you are consulting the situation is of course a bit different. The situation is temporary. Getting and verifying references is actually legal and possible. So I can definitely see that you get gigs this way (you'd also get hired without solving a coding challenge because many companies don'T do it actually).

I just personally would feel much safer joining a company as an employee where I can be certain that my colleagues can at least code and have been selected with appropriate care.
The 600% annualized is an important part of that: if you started with $1000 you'd need only four years to hit a million. Four more and it's a billion.
Troubleshooting Debian Bullseye boot and freeze issues on HP Proliant servers
Charlemagne’s DNA and Our Universal Royalty
There should be something more specific about Tinder there. Cannot see how two-parent family units will not decline even further over the next few decades (not the only factor there of course but asking for government hand-outs is not the solution either).
Every ICE car I've ever driven did exactly that with the 'reserve' where the needle is already at (or below) the zero line but you still get about 50 km of range.
That seems like a lot of work.

They could just say that John Cage's 4'33" is playing in the background[1]. :P

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4%E2%80%B233%E2%80%B3
Concretely, what exactly are you claiming is duplicated?
Pq – Parse and Query files with PromQL-like query language
The basis of the headline has already been posted here. He put shares into a Roth IRA. He didn't control those businesses legally speaking. If he doesn't touch it before he's 65 he gets the gains tax free.

This is available to all americans. The fact that he did well as an investor is why it's increased to a value of $5bn+.

But hey, Trump supporting Contrarian Billionaire doesn't pay Tax gets a lot of clicks and ad revenue right?
It depends a bit on the consulting firm, but most are indeed "serial hired hands" like the blog says.

Most are fine to be for 2-5 years though as a fresh grad. You'll get some experience. Most good people move on to freelancing or something else after a while though*, I wasn't too impressed with most of the people who were there 10+ years.

* The company I worked for has an exodus of about 10-30 employees starting their own small company every ~10 years, since they reckon they can do the same with less overhead and bullshit for more pay. They're probably right.
So, in the end all of languages move closer to StandardML :D Like even python has sum-types and pattern matching now!
> they are to filter out people who simply can't program.

The problem is they also filter out people who get nervous during tests. I'm someone who marginally failed a programming test and am now one of the most in-demand developers at my company (where I failed the test). The tech director who rejected my failed test has since told me not hiring me to his team at that time was one of the biggest mistakes of his career and I've also heard he's stopped being a believer in programming tests because of my application.

I've also been involved in hiring decisions and I've hired people who have bombed programming tests (and in ways where it was clear they just didn't grok the logic they should have). They've also been perfectly fine contributors, because our test questions required knowledge that wasn't going to be relevant (a CRUD-gluer doesn't really need to be proficient with geometry).

I still believe programming tests are useful, though. In the hiring I've done, it has been one factor to discuss during the interview. We always give developers a take-home test and then discuss the results in the interview. If they messed up, we illustrate where their solution is wrong and see if they're able to reason through the problem. If they didn't mess up, hey, that's a great sign.

If we can see them really start re-reasoning through the problem, that's a good sign that they (a) don't take programming failure personally and (b) are the sort of person who will re-evaluate what they think they know. On the other hand, if they just throw up their hands and give up without really giving the problem any extra effort, that's a bad sign. Our reasoning for this approach is that everyone writes bugs, but nobody gets to give up when fixing bugs.

As an aside, we've never tested someone who just couldn't write a for loop at all, so it's possible our hiring pool is different and so our needs/solutions are different.

And for context, the take-home test questions we use (they're always the same and they're not a secret) are:

1. Given a rectangle and a point, write a function to determine if the point is within a certain distance of the rectangle.

2. Given a string, write a function that determines if any permutation is a palindrome (this one's for the over-engineers who don't first think through the problem)

3. Write a CLI dice game where the computer cheats to maintain around a 70% win rate (there are some basic rules for scoring I'm leaving out for space - this one people rarely get totally wrong, but talking about why they picked a particular cheating mechanism can be enlightening).
> Sometimes the wife is pregnant

The mid project reveal is always "surprise we are pregnant". It brings me great added joy when they are building a 'dream' 3 bedroom house and it is the 3rd kid that they are pregnant with.
Data-first and data-last: a comparison of APIs (2019)
A telescope on the moon will not need any gyroscopes. The first Hubble visit was to fix a manufacturing/testing flaw impossible in a radio telescope.

Arecibo's failure would also be impossible, as there is no oxidation and no weather on the moon. The only likely failure mode would be from metal fatigue as a consequence of temperature swings, but they are 100% predictable.

Maybe you are not aware of the very large difference between an optical telescope and a radio telescope? Optical telescopes always have many precision moving parts. Radio telescopes often have none at all.

Anyway, in ten years, given promised SpaceX Starship progress, a visit will be much cheaper than a single Shuttle visit to ISS. Probably such progress will end up turning on thousands of heat-shield tiles not each needing a diaper change after each flight, as the current design seems to require.