skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> You should think of this as a problem. Even if it's not for your boss or your teammates (and it will be, eventually), it is for you

Low output engineers can often coast for years before something forces them back on to the job market. Usually, routine layoffs force companies to take a hard look at who's producing and who's not, at which point the lowest productivity individuals are the most likely to be cut.

This is where the real problems begin: If someone has spent years or even a decade doing very little actual work, they're now effectively years behind their peers with similar career lengths. Even if they could cram enough to skate through interviews, they can struggle when forced to work at normal productivity levels in a normal organization. Years of accumulated habits can be hard to break.

I've interviewed a significant number of employees who (I suspect) fit this mold: They landed an easy job at a big company that didn't look too closely at their output, spent years coasting while doing little work as possible, but then something forces them out of the job and into interviews at other companies. It's surreal to speak to someone with a decade of confirmed experience but a level of knowledge equivalent to what I see out of the average motivated college graduate.
Now that i work from home, i go to the gym, do chores, take naps, cook meals etc
"is going to be"?
They're going to die regardless. Is it better to die younger from lack of health care than die older with dementia and bed sores? I've only witnessed the latter. Doesn't seem like something I'd like to go through.
If they're not paying the city for it then they're giving it to them, but that doesn't mean they're not paying for it.

The idea that there is no "pay to play" going on in local politics is absurd. But the public is not getting anything for their tax dollars in return when that happens under the table and no fees are placed in the local Gov's coffers.

What do you think those restaurants would do if the city allowed catering trucks to sit in those parking spots for free and serve food right outside a their front door all day and night?

What if I own a business next door to them? How does that not inconvenience my patrons?

This is flashback to what we used to call "Yuppies" back in the `80s. I lived in LA then. Not much has changed there except the gentrification of places like Venice Beach.
The same thing haired at my company this year. It was an acquihire, straight up, and they led with that fact right off the top, but told us our existing brand, company, structure, etc would be unchanged until at least the end of the year. Well today we got a first look at that change, and what they’ve done is take all our managers and put them under a middle tier guy from the acquiring company then shuffle the people around so that some of us have new managers as soon as tomorrow morning. And who goes where hasn’t been announced yet either.

It seems to me that in our case this is the first step of eventually eradicating the acquired company entirely, a near borg-like assimilation, just slowly enough so as not to be jarring to the engineers that they ultimately want (us).

Moral of the story is that in just shot every case, the acquired company gets phased out, its evolves “assimilated”, and the new order is established on high with the unspoken hierarchy of those being acquired aren’t really part of the whole, not really anyway. You wind up getting tested as the B team even if you’re provably better than their A team.

So yeah, your job is about to change and you’ll be assimilated. Have no illusions Scott their goals, the way you liked things is being killed off, intentionally. You’ll never have the political clout internally that you should because of that unspoken hierarchy, and that likely hamstring your effectiveness as a manager.

In your shoes, I’d be dusting off my resume.
I've encountered this so many times myself, and I still get burned on it, but mostly because sometimes the work you're doing is so technically interesting that the "reward" is the work itself. Then, when you finish, you somehow expect everyone to celebrate and take it easy but then they shove more work at you.

You couple that with maybe one day your project gets cancelled, and not due to the quality of the work itself but for other business reasons, and all of a sudden you just don't care anymore. This is something that just happened to me recently and I find it incredibly hard to get motivated to work hard on anything. I just can't "logic" my way into doing more than the bare minimum.
IIRC Quiver Quant does that for you.
nah they're definitely done introducing new products and/or changing the way their devices communicate.
There has to be some sort of ceiling, sure, but the point of focusing on a rate of change is that the ceiling is constantly moving too, no matter what you consider the "ceiling".

There are many ceilings. E.g. there's the carrying capacity of earth. But that carrying capacity changes with technological improvements. There's the carrying capacity of the solar system that changes as we get the technology to settle more and more other planets. There's the number of housing units currently available, and the amount of food currently produced, and so on.

But a lot of these current ceilings are highly malleable given time to address them, which is why what matters is the rate of change.

Even if one assumes there is a hard ceiling on capacity for earth that no technological advance can overcome, as long as the rate of change is low enough we can bypass that by building off-earth colonies fast enough .

So ultimately, while you're right there are ceilings, it's still the rate of change that matters: We can build or obtain more buckets to move water to, but we need enough time to do so.
It's worth noting that Rust's Async functionality starts with very different priorities from Go's goroutines. Rust, as a systems language, made lack of overhead (allocations, etc) the highest priority. It's part of Rust's overall zero-cost abstractions ethos. Goroutines are just never going to be zero cost. Go chose to prioritize the interface to the programmer, which is much more a part of Go's ethos around being simple.

There's nothing wrong with either approach, they just have different trade-offs because their goals are different. Rust's approach will sometimes push complexity onto the programmer to handle. But it can be made to perform better and more predictably than the Go equivalent. This might not matter if you're not pushing the performance envelope, but if you are, Rust makes that possible in a way that Go simply doesn't. You'd never want to write code using goroutines for an embedded device with limited CPU/memory, but Rust's async is already proving useful for these sorts of projects.

However if you can tolerate the performance overhead that Go imposes, giving the programmer a simpler mental model can easily be worthwhile. Technology is all about trade-offs and you have to choose the right tool for the job.
But why think understanding is not computational? It certainly enables a lot of computational behaviors, its effects can be modeled by computation. What power does understanding endow a system that a priori is beyond computation to capture?
Show HN: Save form data to Google Sheets
And really, from its very launch the base SNES couldn't handle most of its library - even Pilotwings, a day 1 launch title, needed an extra chip to handle its enhanced mode 7 background effects.
Calling 10 "good" is a stretch. I'd still be using 7 if it wasn't for security updates. The snip tool and multiple desktops are the only things I use, and in exchange I have a truckload of stuff I have to disable to even make my OS usable, a useless search function and obscured menus, absolutely not worth it.

I have no hope of win12 being anywhere near good and will probably switch to about anything else.
Eh. It varies a lot. But my own experience interacting with these groups is that I think what they want is everything. They want a ONS but they also want someone who wants more with them. They want the option for more but then to reject it.

Basically, they want to feel desired for more than just a ONS but then reject it anyway. I think many people are like this but it’s very prevalent with women I’ve interacted with…
> I know that at least on most common performance benchmarks these claims are measurably false

What "these claims" are you referring to? It seems you are taking issue with only one specific claim of my comment, namely than GPT-3 6B is better quality than GPT-J 6B. Evaluations run by Eulether folks are available here [1] and I have the opposite subjective experience from you.

But even assuming I'm wrong, that doesn't change at all the substance of what I am saying: If you need better quality than GPT-J, then GPT-3 (DaVicing, 175B) is your only option.

And if you care about latency, last time I checked (6 months ago) OpenAI was miles ahead.

> in particular code generation for 6B is very clearly a strength of GPT-J even above the 275B GPT-3.

Note on that: ~8% of GPT-J training data is GitHub code, that's not the case for GPT-3 hence the difference. But OpenAI has a separate model avaiable in their API called Codex that is specifically tailored for code generation (also the model behind GH copilot) and that is much much better than GPT-J: Even the 300M params version of Codex outperforms it [2], and the API gives you access to a 12B version.

I'm not trying to sell you OpenAI's API though, it has indeed pretty severe limitations, I'm only saying there are real reasons that people might want to use it contrary to what the comment I was replying to was saying, and just replicating what they do isn't exactly a walk in the park.

[1]: https://arankomatsuzaki.wordpress.com/2021/06/04/gpt-j/
[2]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.03374.pdf
Yeah, I've been using it for a while, but with the barrage of memes and politics on the internet nobody finds out about the good stuff until years later.
This reminds me of an old minecraft server I played on which had a Great Northern Road that someone started building, and was continued by various people. You could just walk on it for hours, through caves, over seas, through mountains... with inns along the way, and scenic overlooks. There was something really special about that, and about extending it when I reached the end. I didn't even play on that server for more than a few days, but that memory is still stuck in my mind.
Is there a quantification for the value you are obligated to provide your company written down in your employment contract? If not, on what basis are you throwing around words like "crime" and "fraud"?
yes i think he talks about that. The difference is he's also looking for (and finding) the 'how' in physical brain structure terms, rather than just theory alone.
its really interesting/disturbing that people put so much blind faith in the organizations pushing these vaccines. so many people are acting unscientifically in the "pursuit of science". science is not something where you blindly trust what the corporations and authority figures tell you.

the safety trials had no control group, the approval was based on 4 months of data, the situation that we are in now seems to suggest they dont really work very well, there certainly is no long term data about what happens when you keep reinjecting boosters over and over, lipid nanoparticles themselves are a novel technology that is not very well understood, most people are at low risk and have no need for it, the list goes on
As the programmer, I don't really care what the h/w does; if I specify u8 and every operation produces results 'as if' the type were 8 actual unsigned bits, eg, when using an underlying u32 type -- great. From 'my model' -- it's still a u8.

But there must be no conceptual 'leaking' (behaviors that I experience using e.g. uint_fast8_t that are in any way different from behaviors I experience when using u8 ).

I don't especially care how the HW works; because my 'virtual machine' is C. (yes, yes, I know Reality intrudes, and sometimes you need to get closer to the machine. But, isn't this because of 'leaking' between 'virtual machine' and 'actual machine' that I mention above?)
I can admit, the initial wording can sound like I am trying to guilt trip. I'll try to be better about that in the future. But to elaborate more I am trying to respond to the question "Is it shameful though?"
Might as well toss out Plumbum: https://plumbum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

No more bash! No more subprocess! Write shell-like code with the convenience of Python!

Seriously, it's a great module. A bit of a learning curve, but then it feels natural.
How do you know?

Another fish, the cleaner wrasse, can apparently recognise itself in the mirror, hinting at some for of self-awareness.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/fish-clea...
True. But that's actually the sort of thing I'd expect an autonomous driving system to likely be able to handle as well as a person.
Yeah, I'm sure over the next few years there will be things that come out worth having, but especially while both are supported it is mostly a new coat of paint with a higher minimum system requirement.

Eventually we'll be there, but there's no incentive to get there right now.
Arguably, all crypto currencies are a scam. The only difference is the timescale - even Bitcoin will 'rug-pull' eventually.

The do not have value in any sense - even sending money overseas is cheaper, more convenient, and more secure by traditional methods.

Money going out + money spent on mining = money coming in.

Crypto evangelists are always keen for punters to put in regular amounts - presumably because then someone can take out regular amounts, and so avoid actually having to work for their living.
So sad to see this happen. Paul Ehrlich made a similar prognostication that never came to pass. There are many places in the world that did a similar thing and had to work to reverse it (S. Korea, Russia), by actually paying families to have children, and China recently reversed its draconian one child policy because they have seen first hand the problems it creates.

Hopefully India doesn't run into the same problem down the road, because one a population starts to decline, history has shown that it is not reversible.
If OP is considered valuable by the organization and everyone is satisfied by their output then they are providing the value they are being paid for. If they feel they are overpaying OP for for the output he is providing then they would PIP him or at the very least say something. OP though has received promotions so they must feel he is doing a good job.
I wish I could share your optimism.
"interested" or "has access to"? most teenagers meet other teenagers in or through school, where they are rigidly separated by year in most activities. it's not surprising they date people exactly their age when that is the majority of people they encounter day-to-day. by college, it seemed to me that the guy was often at least one to two years older in hetero couples. of course, same year was not uncommon, but I can't remember a single case where the woman was more than one year older than the man.
And if understanding a market were that simple no one would ever need anything more than economics 101. That isn't reality.
Tell that to Martha Stewart.
Another point of confusion among many folks is monorepos. Some consider "monorepos = monoliths", which is more like comparing apples to oranges imo.

Monorepos provide some of the benefits of monoliths in terms of
1) making it easier to refactor your entire codebase at once
2) sharing some common dependencies like framework versions etc., which makes it much easier to keep those up to date and more secure, as a result
3) sharing some common utilities like unit testing harnesses etc.
4) other things

At the same time, monorepos don't force one into a monolith architecture at all, an in fact can provide most of the same benefits of microservices in terms of separate deployments etc.

The most important lesson in my mind is, there's no "panacea" or "perfect structure" as a prescribed way to do things. Every system has its own demands (which also change over time), and the only "should" is to tailor things on a case-by-case basis, adjusting to a better structure when needed.
One of my all time favourite PL quotes
(call me by name, or call me by value)[0]

[0] https://wiki.c2.com/?NiklausWirth
I think you would want to create a federated members only collection of websites, pay a few hundred influencers to move their base of operations into the collective, and then set and keep the annual subscription so low that the cost isn't prohibitive to 80% of the potential audience.

Ad free reddit, youtube, twitter, and the like, all populated only by people who paid to be there and not an ad or corporate sponsor in site except within a walled garden of delights (for the influencers)?

I'd pay $10 a month for that.
The insane tech job market of 2021 in Ukraine
My, that's a very long... arm... you have.
> But lawmakers in this country are allergic to having the government manage anything

Congress has slowly been fucking the USPS to death at the behest of FedEx, UPS, et al lobbyists.
A Comparison of Bitcoin’s Environmental Impact with That of Gold and Banking
On the right committees I think you could probably do pretty well knowing when to buy SPY puts.
It came before they were hackable. I have been following it for years. It was fun seeing cheap Chinese smart devices being exposed and each WiFi enabled one would have an ESP8266 and only it aside from some SMD capacitors and resistors. I’m not saying they were sold as hackable. I’m saying they were deciphered easily as the only microcontroller required for the smart devices.
The main issue with the evaluation rules is that Mathematica doesn't distinguish between creating a symbolic expression and evaluating code. That is if I type

f[x]

and the function `f` is not defined, Mathematica will not give me an error but instead just assume that I meant to create a symbolic expression. If you know some Lisp, just imagine that everything came with an implicit `quote` which would automatically get invoked whenever a unbound variable or function would we encountered.

That issue alone has caused me so many errors simply from mistyping some function or variable name. For simple expressions, such bugs are pretty obvious to spot but if the same occurs deep inside a chain of function calls, this often lead to completely wrong results because the bug got masked by some other manipulations I did on the result of the function call.

Of course, there are tons of hacks and ad-hoc workarounds in Mathematica to get around this (imho fundamentally broken) behaviour to the tune of "just stick another `Evaluate` here" or "just change the function definition from `g[x_]` to `g[x_?NumericQ]` to call the function only when the argument is numeric and otherwise leave it unevaluated".

The situation with the scoping rules is not much better. Consider for instance the following code:

y = 1;
expression = Module[{y},1+y]; (* Module creates a new scope in which y is unbound *)

Can you guess what happens if I print out `expression` now?

Print[expression]
1+y$4066

Yes, Mathematica has just renamed our variable. If now we wanted to set `y` in our expression to some concrete value, of course the obvious thing to try doesn't work, but just gives me some bullshit:

Print[ReplaceAll[expression, y->10]]
10+y$4066

These are all only some simple examples of why doing any kind of metaprogramming in Mathematica just sucks.
Long time manager here as well.

I am fully aware of the amount of work developers do and never expect more than 50% of their time to be spent in full focus. But this amounts to around 20h per week.

The kind of behavior you describe amounts to me as medium-low performance, but as some other people mentions; there are other types of behaviors that are much more problematic because they disrupt the proper functioning of teams.

If you have low performance, but are not problematic and have other qualities that are positive; you won't be last in the list when thinking about salary raises nor first in the list when redundancies are needed. The other more problematic types will be instead.
Keep in mind not everything is in SV.
I actually don't think Click is too much global state and spookiness, at least in relation to a lot of popular Python libraries.

I do wish I could hook into it to test better, the only thing you can really do right now is to have it print stuff out and assert the output string. It's not really necessary to just build a CLI with click, but I want to build a library that integrates with it and testing the integration is a PITA.

I want to write a config-loading library for CLI apps like Golang's Viper lib, but for Python
There are a few sites. For example: https://www.quiverquant.com/sources/senatetrading
Just wanted to point out that this

> I truly believed in the mission, worked hard, was paid a lot, achieved great things and was overall very satisfied.

and this

> used to leave at 5pm sharp

are not mutually exclusive.

We have this weird thing in tech where we think that, to be passionate, you have to work yourself into the ground. But this is stupid. There's organizational psych research going back decades showing that teams who work 40-hour weeks will quickly outperform teams working 60 hrs / week. For one thing, they make fewer mistakes and thus have less work to re-do. Fewer bugs to fix.

I've done more than one stretch of intense, focused programming and CS research work when I was a grad student. There was one period of two weeks when my buddy and I both put in about 116 hours one week and 118 hours the next week. I have basically no memory of anything that happened in those weeks, and I never have since like one month afterwards -- like a drug addict on a bender or something. I guess it worked out OK. We got our papers published. But our actual productivity in those last few weeks must have been absolute garbage.

In contrast, I spent last academic year on sabbatical building out my side project, and I don't think there was even one week where I put in more than 60 hours. Personally I can sustain 45 or 50-hour weeks basically indefinitely. But if I ever tried to push it above 55, there was a big price to be paid, and I was useless and braindead for the following day or two.

Be passionate, love what you do, but don't hurt yourself doing it.

There's a quote that I like: Most people vastly over-estimate what they can achieve with intense effort over the span of a week. And they vastly under-estimate what they can accomplish with sustained, moderate effort over the course of a year.
Cool !! So now she can free CEOs and billionaires from having to disclose their sales and bring them down to the congressional standard.

/s

I hate hypocrites - regardless of their party affiliation.
Isn't the simple explanation for child birth falling so rapidly being the participation of women in the workforce? I didn't do any research but I just always assumed that it is.
I feel like there's an inside joke I'm missing here
I think OP was saying they're not Harvard, and thus not coasting based off those connections alone.
> Something continuously does not work: multiple screens, waking up from sleep etc.

That's my experience with Windows as well though. On Dell xps on windows my external monitor goes blank sometimes and sleep randomly causes overheating and fast battery drain. On the other hand Linux handles it just fine. Win is not consistently better anymore.