skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The argument made wasn't that paying more secures something. Just that paying more allows better response to insecurities.
> Oh and RCE might happen.

You added a feature that can load plugins and query any kind of data based on user provided strings, this is completely unexpected and never happened before. What to call it? How about SQL injection attack, sounds about fancy enough.

If you implement feature requests without thinking about the design and security implications it has you are doomed to repeat history.
Is that a मस्त कलेण्डर ?
It depends on your objectives but for most people it would be better something with support for array programming like numpy, Julia or Matlab since the ecosystem is better. Otherwise I would try J.
Review by Mr Casinos
reviews of casinos in ukraine and not only
If my code compiles and runs correctly the first time, I spend an inordinate amount of time looking for bugs in it ;)
> There is one thing I will never understand, why do a lot of people talk about speed limits as the speed you need to be driving? It’s the maximum speed you can reach before being fined, it doesn’t mean “oh man I’m driving at 90km/h and the limit is 100, that’s so wrong”.

Different traffic laws. In Germany, there's only a lower limit on the Autobahn, and there's an advisory speed limit that in precedent cases you must be able to maintain if your vehicle and road (and weather) conditions permit but in practice is somewhat overrun, which is legal.

Most states in the US penalize overspeeding, but also penalizes underspeeding on state and interstate highways if car, road and weather conditions otherwise permit. While counterintuitive, in highways (especially interstate ones) there's an expectation of a "belt" of vehicles that maintain more-or-less the same speed: different speeds of vehicles should be on different lanes (the innermost being the fastest lane otherwise posted in signage).
Actually, no, an email is not required. It's a dark pattern. You just need to click "Continue" without entering any email address.
I worked for 3 years as a unionized game developer at public sector company in Canada and can confirm it is absolutely the best situation - for developers. All other non-unionised companies I’ve worked for - except for the small boutiques - were deeply unhappy burnout factories. Yes, you can vote with your feet - but the journey to the door is over searing hot coals.

Unionise.
n=1 but I remember interviewing with them in 2014-15 and their founder (Archit) came across as really lacking humility.

He called people from big companies as lazy (I was coming from a BigCo). At one point, he laughed when I mentioned writing code in a language he felt was outdated.

And of course like any toxic startup they expected me to work 6 days a week.
Eh, Nepo's good record against Magnus comes mostly from when they were both playing in youth tournaments. He hasn't beaten Magnus in many years.
Countless defi loans provided in minutes.
Another place to host your html is https://ichi.city
That was a fantastic video. It gave intuitive explanations to not just the hypothesis itself but how certain biochemical mechanisms function. Thanks for linking it.
I have seen some gameplay footage and it's almost always worse than what reddit complained about.
I don't understand the first commenter. Seems like just plain old fun. I love it.
How are you measuring this? Remember that cloudwatch was apparently also losing metrics, so aggregating CW metrics might show that kind of drop.
Pilots are closer to doctors and as long as they pass physical, they wear their hours like a badge of honor.
It's one thing to have a vision, it's another to execute it. As of late, he had made enemies of space fans and people across the space industries, and destroyed the morale of his workers at his own companies, all the while achieving very little.

Blue Origin is older than SpaceX, and yet SpaceX is far ahead.
Microsoft back to its old tricks to get an edge on the competition
I think it's been popularized by the NBA fandom and the incessant Lebron James vs Michael Jordan debates.
Learn APL. Back to the roots. You’ll be pleasantly surprised. https://xpqz.github.io/learnapl
One way to think about rebellion is as an act of self defense against a tyrannical government.

Most of the pro-2A activity that I see these days seems to revolve around self defense arguments as opposed to earlier arguments (1980s or so) revolved around hunting/sporting.

I'm not saying rebellion isn't a commonly cited part of the 2A, but it's probably one of the least persuasive arguments and doesn't get trotted out much in polite company.
At some point, languages and frameworks become as interchangeable as different brands of tools. Sure, you can have a favorite brand with strengths and weaknesses, but someone who's used one powered screwdriver or handheld sander can pick up any other one quickly, and it's actually possible to reach that point with code.
There's a different perspective, which is that there are different kinds of management. At the very least there's line management, project management, product strategy, business design/strategy, and operational/delivery strategy.

Sales engineers can also have customer/client consulting management roles.

Some companies promote good engineers to R&D and product strategy roles. They're still engineering-led, and not particularly about day to day development issues or longer term - but still very clearly defined - project goals.

Most of what's being described as management really seems to be line management. What you want from management is at least as much of the other types.

Generalists who can invent the future with some accuracy are particularly valuable. Giving them space to pursue that within some very broad strategic goals is far more valuable than "promoting" them to team management.
>so if they do well on leetcode you just assume they did well in their past jobs.

wat? how did you draw that crazy conclusion?

even competitive programmers says that there's probably negative correlation between good engineer and competitive programmer

and I'm saying this as a person who doesn't mind having to solve algo questions
> Outrage is the easy response. Empathy and learning is the valuable one.

I'm outraged that AWS, as a company policy, continues to lie about the status of their systems during outages, making it hard for me to communicate to my stakeholders.

Empathy? For AWS? AWS is part a mega corporation that is closing in on 2 TRILLION dollars in market cap. It's not a person. I can empathize with individuals who work for AWS but it's weird to ask us to have empathy for a massive faceless, ruthless, relentless, multinational juggernaut.
Your mention of Joel's post made me curious to find and read it. I assume this is the post in question: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/10/25/the-guerrilla-guid...

I'd say much has changed since he wrote that, and even for the time it contains some odd advice which he tries to force down the throat of the reader, but I'd be more interested to hear other's thoughts on the article.
This language reminds me of Gröfaz.
IMHO it's not a difference between courses and production, but rather about the difference between preprocessing needs of different NLP ML approaches.

For some of NLP methods all the extra preprocessing steps were absolutely crucial (and took most of the time in production) and for other NLP methods they are of limited benefit and even harmful - and it's just that in older courses (and many production environments still!) the former methods are used, so the preprocessing needs to be discussed, but if you're using a BERT-like system, then BERT (or something similar) and its subword tokenization effectively becomes your preprocessing stage.
Automata Runs as Sheaves
It is at least neutral in terms of not favouring one profit making entity instead of another.

The Document Foundation and contributing developers are not better off or worse off if a public school district uses LibreOffice or not. It simply does not matter. They rely on donations for revenue instead of using monopoly powers to extract revenue by permitting the use of their software. Same goes for OnlyOffice and other FLOSS office suites.

On the other hand, if a public school district chooses for example Microsoft Office, this is to the direct detriment of Apple iWork and StarOffice and Lotus(does it still exist?), etc.. This of course becomes a subject of public acquisitions which should be handled through transparent auctions. How often should the choice be made? Once a year, once 2 years? Should there be a round-robin strategy to switch from one provider to another in order to not favour one through network effects? All large software corps rely on the network effects of schools and piracy to further solidify their grip on an industry.

Even if you claim that choosing the FLOSS option is non-neutral due to the network effect, in this case the network effect does not have the same ramifications it does for proprietary offerings.

So even if the FLOSS choice may not be absolutely neutral, it is MORE neutral than any proprietary option.
It’s important to keep a sense of humor and humility about working with logic machines from our squishy salt water meat brains.

There are only two kinds of programmers in this world. Those who don’t make anything, and those who create sev 10 global security nightmares.
Standard RL algorithms will converge to optimal play versus a fixed opponent, but will not find an optimal policy via self play.

One intuitive way to see this is that a sequence of improving pure policies A < B < C < etc. will converge to optimal play in a perfect information game like chess, but not necessarily in an imperfect information game like rock/paper/scissors where Rock < Paper < Scissors < Rock, etc
It feels like the other way round to me, can you clarify why you think that a multiple choice questionnaire is more subjective than an algorithmic interview?
FWIW, Unstoppable Domains is already supported by both Brave and Opera (which I found interesting), and, from my determination, has a much greater chance of even more widespread adoption (due to it not being such a conflict with ICANN). (It has its own issues, but I frankly feel like all of these projects are still a bit "sketch". That said, I am not really pro- the premise of websites relying on permanent human-mappable identifiers in the first place, as I feel there are a ton of philosophical failings that people mostly just try to pretend don't exist down that road. I would much prefer projects like this just use EVM addresses as their underlying address and then users could potentially allow ENS names to map to those if they absolutely must have names locally, but then the names aren't really the canonical bits: permanent unique names just have too many moral landmines to be acceptable.)
War... War never changes
If it is an old codebase that you are not sure of the origin of all the code, then you need to do a code audit and maybe even consult a lawyer.

Do not publish the history. Fresh start for open source.
I didn’t get a sense of arrogance at all. It feels like a gentle poking with love!
South Korea cuts human interaction in push to build ‘untact’ society
Good and valid question.

The former implies single entity responsibly, while the latter is more like an ecosystem problem. So which is it?
Sounds like a lot of useful stuff but you'd still be better if you were more technically knowledgeable.
>And of course like any toxic startup they expected me to work 6 days a week.

Is that significantly different from other workplaces in India?
In other words: the nervous system is there for action, hence specifically to take decisions, and decisions imply a notion of the peri-optimal and counteroptimal.

Your jump to "feelings" is not that short; but one could note that, as «brain» is above better replaced by "nervous system", the one directly apparent thing of the nervous system is the peripheral side of sensation (feeling - that of "action" being the clearly functional one).
why startup == more innovation?

>create more wealth rather than helping the big tech giants become bigger

should I care that some startup will become relatively significant and then sell itself once big offer appears?
I’m an artist and musician and my iPad Pro is pretty much useless because it can’t run any real software programs. It can only run what are essentially mobile apps. It’s pretty pathetic considering it’s the price of a new laptop.
I'd pitch in SolidJS on the lightweight part. Overhead is close to zero and the library is ~15Kb I think.
The reality is that the org structure for engineering companies is broken.

Reasons:

1. The org chart shows a tree with managers on top of engineers - Big mistake because the manager will not be able to accomplish anything without reports

2. People "promoted" into management are usually the ones who WANT to be a manager. Wanting to be one is good but the reasons for wanting it should align with the company. Far too many people want to become managers for the TITLE. These people are parasites and will destroy the whole team by virtue of insecurity and sycophantism.

3. Many senior engineers are quite capable of managing teams. They should be encouraged by directors to try becoming a team lead - focus on tech aspects of a larger team, keep people happy.

A better org structure for fast moving engineering companies could be something akin to European soccer clubs of high caliber

1. Director aka Technical director - Reports to VP - Has the power of the purse but is also deeply technical to understand what bets their group is taking. Responsible for hiring, projects, org structure, pay and culture

2. Engineering manager aka club manager - Reports to Director - Only responsible for coaching, mentoring and allocating resources to produce outcomes. Their key responsibility is outcomes and it requires keeping people happy, engaged and growing. They need to be deeply technical, much more so than directors to be effective in their job.

3. Senior/Team lead engineers aka coaches/leaders - Works with EM but reports to director - Responsible for driving their own area of expertise/projects. Much like a goalkeeping coach drives goalkeepers only. Only difference is that Senior/Team lead should also be expected to contribute directly to projects. These people are not responsible for happiness or cultivation of other skills or producing other opportunities

4. ICs aka the players themselves - Real MVPs of the team - Should be paid higher than EM because the EM is replaceable but the players often aren't. Should be shielded from politics but should be incentivized by money and status to remain ICs. This is how you get players like Cristiano Ronaldo not retiring too early to get into coaching.

I would be very inclined to join a company where ICs are treated better because I have seen management-heavy companies lose sight of what is really important for the company.
Mini digital marketing newsletter from Toronto
Digitalk mini newsletter is a weekly editorial designed on substack platform.
The newsletter is published on Tuesdays form Toronto.
Mahmood Bashash whose English is his second language is the founder of Digitalk and he is inspiring others by showing that coming out of comfort zone is a main step towards entrepreneurship.
Mahmood is looking for new subscribers to his newsletter.
There are a lot of comments in here that boil down to "could you do infrastructure better?"

No, absolutely not. That's why I'm on AWS.

But what we are all ACTUALLY complaining about is ongoing lack of transparent and honest communications during outages and, clearly, in their postmortems.

Honest communications? Yeah, I'm pretty sure I could do that much better than AWS.
That's malarkey. It may happen that way but it's certainly not common in my experience.
This would be an example of someone using a loose metaphor when they should be using the thing that they are supposed to be invoking with a figure of speech.

To get insurance, you want to pay for and write an insurance contract. The arrangement should be calculated on the same basis as insurance. If you do not actually want insurance and want a dedicated assurance that a FOSS project will be patched quickly, you don't want insurance, you want a contractual guarantee from some individual or group that it will happen when the event triggers, and you have to be prepared to enforce that contract through whatever legal mechanisms are available.

By thinking this through we can also see that 'insurance' was a weak metaphor in the first place. In a situation like the underlying one, you don't just need a contract to pay out cash: you actually need labor to fix the vulnerability immediately.
>I think that staying employed as a software developer for 10+ years is a good indication of skill, far better than any random coding assignment.

I disagree.

Exp is nowhere close to being perfect proxy for skills
One of the good things about forming a legal entity is that it forces the conversation of how wealth will be distributed up front. One of the problems when forming an entity is that you don’t actually know how valuable someone’s contributions will be until you start working together. One founder providing more value than another happens all the time in startups and is why vesting exists.

This squad seems to operate like a DAO, but without any mechanism to reward ownership via a token. The author did mention being a pre-DAO collective, so maybe they’ll form an official DAO to determine stake.

If the goal is to just make stuff for fun and to learn, then perhaps it doesn’t matter. But if one of the projects becomes valuable, I could see it becoming a problem once money is involved to determine who owns what.
Rapid chess is almost a different game, shown by how handily Carlsen beat Caruana in the tie breakers.
They can make all forms of contraception illegal and afterwards deal with a whole new category of unpredicted selfinflicted social issues.
>[...] Incidentally, one of the Log4j maintainers’ GitHub sponsors profile is here, if you would like to contribute some money to his cause. [...] these companies should ponder which is more expensive: $100k/year salary for a maintainer of a project they are heavily dependent upon,

I don't understand the logic of cause & effect the author laid out.

Commercial software with well-paid programmer employees also have long lists of CVE/RCE including MS Windows, Azure, AWS, Adobe PDF reader, Oracle database, etc.

I think the crux of the author's argument is the 2nd paragraph:

>Like many projects, Log4j is only maintained by volunteers, and because of this, coordination of security response is naturally more difficult: a coordinated embargo is easy to coordinate, if you have a dedicated maintainer to do it. In the absence of a dedicated maintainer, you have chaos: as soon as a commit lands in git to fix a bug, the race is on: security maintainers are scurrying to reverse engineer what the bug you fixed was, which is why vulnerability embargoes can be helpful.

Exactly how does a permanent paid $100k salary change the "vulnerability embargo" window in this particular case?

E.g. the log4j JNDI code fix was night of December 4: https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/commit/d82b47c6fae9...

The widespread news of the RCE was December 9.

How does extra funding change the timeline and coordinate a better embargo? Or asked another way, how do the commercial vendors manage voluntary information embargos better because they have dedicated paid staff?
That doesn’t make it at all acceptable for them to treat the people that work there the way they do.

Doing so makes you at least complicit in that, and at most an active perpetuator of it.
When you talk of fully solved positions, that doesn't really include openings, does it? There are no opening moves that can guarantee a victory, so there are no solved openings. Truly solved moves are all in the late game, where it becomes possible to evaluate all possible moves and know for sure what is the best course of action.

I also think that even in truly solved positions, there are cases where the known best case is a draw or even defeat, but that assumes perfect play from your opponent. If you suspect your opponent can be lured into making mistakes, sub-optimal moves on your part could lead to a victory where in perfect play the outcome would be defeat or a draw.

To take an extreme case, the various 'check mate in 3 moves' openings do work against some players, though they are very bad moves against remotely decent opponents.
Never go full enterprise level thinking.
> For me ability to code (like knowledge of programming language) is a necessary but relatively minor ability of a good software developer.

Absolutely. I have been in tech since the eighties and it’s remarkable to me how all the other skills that used to be necessary to create quality systems have seemingly taken a backseat to this skill. There are far to many developers with a severe lack of good engineering and troubleshooting capabilities nowadays…but boy are they fluent in the language de jour
It's none obvious that various cognitive skills (and the amount of energy/motivations) decline at the same rates and that managing and programming requires the same skills.
'Undue hesitation' is something else (eg: failing to enter a roundabout when there's a safe opportunity to do so, especially if this causes other road users to also be unable to enter the roundabout).

'Appropriate speed' is definitely a potential minor (or major) error on your driving test (and you are marked as failing for either a single major or three or more minors in the same category).

Generally, it's up to the examiner's discretion whether speed is 'appropriate', but often lenience will not be more than 10% of the speed limit (unless there are other factors, such as weather, road surface, visibility, etc. which would make it unsafe to travel at the posted speed limit).
In America too, they frequently let the convicts go to their mother's funerals.
If you see his job to be at the cutting edge of Ruy/Marshall/anti-Marshall the results of games 1-6 suggest he’s done a phenomenal job.
Any language that performs work not directly specified by the user has a runtime. Go's runtime is minimal and concerned with two important aspects of the language: scheduler, and garbage collection.
>If you don't grind, there's no signal of how good you are at coding

hardest and most important thing in software engineering is (imo) modeling systems, it's definitely not kind of skill that can be measured by LC.

Strong understanding of OOP itself makes you top% programmer/software engineer.

Add strong understanding of functional programming to it and you're probably 0.x%
In Germany, you would be insured either way, as long as it's direct business travel.
Take the L, Microsoft. Nobody wants your stinky browser or your search engine. It amazes me how corporations can sink so low.
The problem with the second paper is that having a "test set" is meaningless when you can access that test set during training - "you" as in the researcher, who develops a system. This is especially so for machine vision datasets like the ones in the paper that have been "done to death". Basically anyone who has access to the test set of a popular benchmark and wants to get their paper published will do everything that can be done to ensure their system does well on the test set.

That is a big flaw in machine learning research in general, but that's for
another conversation, I guess. My point above is that if neural nets could
generalise well, they wouldn't need so much data. In a sense, even if trained
neural net models can generalise to instances outside the dense region of
instance space circumscribed by their training set that is not that important,
if that region has to be gigantic for this generalisation to be possbile in the
first place. For one thing, at that point it becomes difficult to separate what
is "training" and what is "test", especially so when test sets are four times
the size of training sets as in typical practice.