skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's often still a market for an interest when it goes from mainstream to niche. And maybe theaters will get a resurgence like vinyl in 30 years.

Meanwhile, I've seen one movie in the theater in the last 20 years and didn't find it enhanced the experience, so I'm glad for quicker streaming releases.
Vipassana is amazing. 10 day is minimum to start. After you sit a 10, there are 1, 3 and 5 available.
I grew up in the Deep South. Rest assured, people lived there before AC was a thing.

Houses were designed for cross ventilation with open windows.

Some houses had wrap around porches on three sides so windows could be left open even when it was raining.

Historically, they made a second outdoor kitchen so you could cook in summer without heating the whole house. To this day, grilling out in summer weather is a common practice.

Etc.
Sounds like it’s time for a move to Cairns. ;-)
Ublock Origin is your friend. Add custom filters to remove these from search results. For example you can remove Pinterest from Google result using filter

google.##.g:has(a[href="pinterest.com"])

And DDG using filter

duckduckgo.##.results > div:has(a[href="pinterest.com"])
Caltech, Standford, and Berkeley are well ahead of the Midwestern schools.
Then what? Three options: never work; work for yourself; work for someone else. Each has its costs and benefits. To assume that one path is the ideal state for absolutely everyone is naïveté beyond belief.
USA should replace marriages with "M corps". Those are special type of corps with just CEO and CFO, capital stock and voting stock, and possibly with more C-suite members (kids) and SVPs (cats, dogs). Alimony would be replaced with golden parachute contracts, if you manage to negotiate it upon forming the corp. Houses, cars and other assets may be made a property of this M corp, but that's subject to negotiations. Same with income: M corp members may invest their incomes into the corp, but don't have to. Whether an LLC can be a member of an M corp, or whether it can have independent investors are all interesting questions that would be resolved by courts.
Just curious, does Roblox push engineers to learn internals of critical software they operate or they lean on vendors.

If vendors, it is reckless.
Would have been horrible when it came to converting Welsh:

https://www.llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysil...
> literally millions of engineers

It’s tens of thousands, tops. And let’s be honest, most of them are highly overrated.

> because they happened to work at some huge companies

Because they made the choice to work at some incredibly evil corporations. Give them some credit, they didn’t sleepwalk into their roles. They did it for that fat cash, and they sold their morals out to do so.

Jokes on them, I have the “fat cash” now and get to choose who I hire. Turns out I’m not a fan of the people who sold out.
Yes? But also, boomers are old now
The Final Cartridge III C64 Desktop
If you're looking for an alternative, try Kagi. Much better search results than DDG/Bing, but it supports all the DDG !bangs. No Google-style knowledge graph/instant answers though, and while the beta is free, they plan to eventually start charging.

https://kagi.com/signup?invite_code=morehumaneweb
> [Why not] join interview loops or take classes/training, attend talks [...] go boating or mountain biking. Watch some sports and play video games[?]

(A) Because there's a fundamental cognitive dissonance to being able to say both "My job is important enough to stay in" and "My job is unimportant enough that I should spend a lot of time doing unrelated things."

(B) Because author doesn't want to pursue alternative hobbies with his work chunk of time. He wants to write exciting code.

(C) Because while employed, there's an expectation that you're doing the work well. If you feel like you aren't, even if you're doing as decent of a job as the system allows you to, it eats at you. Badly.
It doesn't work like that. You have to be "on" even if you aren't working. That means you feel like you can't commit to anything substantial since you feel like you should be working. Fucking off on the internet is a coping mechanism to numb the pain of being in this limbo where you aren't working; but, feel like you should be working because you are getting paid a lot. In retrospect it's easy to see that there's this spare time available to do other things; but, when you are in it, it's not obvious where the boundary is between this extra time and where the work time should be. I know it sounds like a first world problem; but, it actually feels really awful to be in this spot because you can't even admit you are there to anyone without feeling like a slacker/loser/failure/time-thief, a torturous trap.
I think it is unfashionable right now, but doesn't really deserve it. I think twitter is more toxic and reddit has bigger echo chambers. Perhaps in a few years everyone will settle down a bit.
Speaking as a child that grew up moving back and forth between two households at my parent’s convenience: it really sucks.
Try DuckDuckGo. It has shortcuts for searching - at last count - 13,565 sites.
I always assumed it was because YT and Search were different groups at Google. This tends to happen all the time. The OneGoogle thing (having one Google account everywhere) must have taken an act of god!
>> At Facebook I could get by barely working a few hours a day. But the job was so unsatisfying

> This is a little too first world. if the work were too sparse and wants more work, why not join interview loops or take classes/training, attend talks?

Where did he mention wanting more work? He mentioned unsatisfying work, I doubt doing interview loop recruiting people when you find your own work unsatisfying is gonna make you a good interviewer (and I'd hate to be the interviewee there). And take classes/training to what end? At 9 years in, I doubt there's many relevant trainings, and learning the intricate details of yet another internal proprietary system has limited returns.

> just go boating or mountain biking. Watch some sports and play video games.

None of these activities leads to finding satisfying, purposeful work, nor are they really good at negating the effects of the unsatisfying work.
China did that by massively reducing the influence and scope of government control & influence over their markets. I don't care whether or not you call that "neoliberal" but it's the same root cause driving those improvements worldwide.
They’re going to fab there and then ship the output to Malaysia, Costa Rica, or the Philippines for package and test. Being close to Detroit doesn’t count for much.
> Long COVID-like symptoms or not, the protection afforded by COVID vaccines still clearly outweighs the negatives.

I don't think it's that simple to make such a blanket statement anymore. In much/most of the developed world, over half the population has already received 2 doses of vaccine and the conversation is moving from "What about the people who choose to remain unvaccinated?" to "Are you fully vaccinated with just 2 doses?" and "How many boosters do we give and how frequently do we give them?" We've gone from thinking that we might need a booster a year to advising people to get boosters just months after a previous jab.

In light of omicron, the cost/benefit analysis is not anywhere near as clear anymore, especially when it comes to these boosters. There's also the issue that risk varies by magnitudes of order between age and comorbidity risk groups, and overall risk of severe outcomes is lower for all groups with omicron.

From the article:

> She says she has preliminary evidence that vaccination can lead to microclots, although in most cases they go unnoticed and quickly disappear—an effect she and a colleague saw in their own blood and that of eight other healthy volunteers, which they sampled after their vaccinations.

This highlights the fact that there's a ton we still don't know. What if there are subclinical effects of vaccination that have the potential to affect people's health in negative ways, either in the near term or long term? Even small changes in uncommonly tested biomarkers can be clinically meaningful over longer time periods.

Perhaps it's reasonable to argue that made the right decision early on by accepting these unknown risks in light of the efficacy of the vaccines at preventing hospitalization and death pre-omicron. But is it reasonable to do that with never-ending boosters when the currently dominant strain is proving to be far less virulent in all groups? Is it still reasonable to push for vaccination and boosting of children and younger and middle-aged adults who are otherwise healthy and at significantly less risk than older, unhealthy groups?

If we just blindly accept that the cost/benefit analysis of vaccination always favors vaccination, how would we ever know that we've crossed a line where that is no longer the case?
Psst: https://kagi.com/signup?invite_code=morehumaneweb
The big jump is now at age 50.[1]

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...
Seems like this could cut either way.

Yeah, older people are more likely to have other priorities, but they’re also more likely to be financially secure and thus able to trade money for time to study. Also, they’re more likely to have gained time management/prioritization skills and discipline that they could apply toward studying.

Ultimately it seems like arguing that older people lack time or inclination depends on ageist stereotypes.
> You can make up whatever rationalizations

The parent post is not "making up" rationalizations nor do I see an attempt to justify Soviet repression.

The Soviets were victims... earlier, during World War II, when their territory was razed to the ground and their people targeted for total racial extermination, and also faced the brunt of that war -- the most destructive war ever -- and did most of the blood shedding. That has to leave a permanent mark in the national psyche. A lot of what they did afterwards was making sure nobody and no country was ever in the position to do that to them, again. They definitely were creating buffer zones to protect their homeland, and I believe most modern analyses agree on this.

This doesn't make them saints. Yes, they were repressive and brutal to satellites they believed felt out of line. But it's not "making up rationalizations", it's what actually happened, and it does explain things.

Also,

> Not expansionist at all

Most powers were expansionist in some way or the other during World War II and its immediate aftermath.
Ask HN: What is your MRR to Deadlift ratio? (dollars to lbs)
That's pretty believable, if long covid is a long term reaction to the spike protein.

It's not like not getting the vaccine would prevent getting long covid in that case though. It does not however explain why getting the vaccine would get rid of long covid though?
Yeah, having an entire day of 4-5 leetcode-esque interviews seems excessive (looking at you Google) but having none also seems irresponsible IME (looking at you government contractors).

I've been in organizations that were spawned by both of the above extremes. The former is definitely more pleasant to work in (everyone is at least competent) even if the interview was much less pleasant to do. I do feel like more orgs should try to target the middle ground instead of just aping Google and going ham on the leetcode shit.
I’m not going to dox myself so you’re going to get some fuzz.

Largest? 400-1500.

Smallest? 30-70.

Compensation was highly variable.

FAANG employees are liabilities best avoided, everyone in leadership positions knows it.
Related, Clothing Poverty: The Hidden World of Fast Fashion and Second-Hand Clothes, by Andrew Brooks examines this world of considerable waste.
> "Most corporations" don't do global surveillance on the scale Facebook does. It's that simple.

It's never that simple.

What corporations are okay to work for, in this unidimensional worldview? Exxon Mobil? Philip Morris? Pfizer? Dupont? Boeing? Nestle? BHP? Fox News? Volkswagen? Nike? HSBC? Is it okay if your employer's owners or executives have appeared in the panama papers? Are or have been on the boards of FAANG companies or own stock in those companies? Are you allowed to buy Google or Apple products and use their services?

What about companies that collect and trade on the personal information and habits they collect about their customers, just not on the scale of Facebook or Google? Are they okay? Even if they would like to be able to sell more personal information but don't presently have the means to would that be okay?

So where do you work? What products and services do you buy?
I think the distinction to be made is between the process of finding the best out of 7,000 and finding someone sufficient out 7,000. The first is surely extremely expensive for companies. The second can be done in a week or two. I think the anecdotal evidence shows though that no company can accurately do the first, and the gamification of this process is a deeply researched topic, so it's likely that a company that believes they're accomplishing the first is really doing the second in practice, all the while spending unnecessary money and time, and deluding themself into thinking they found the needle in the haystack.

My belief is that if you aren't doing Ph.D. level research, all you need to do is get the candidate to prove they can write themselves out of a bag with React/Python. Anything else is overkill, and a real cost loss to the business in terms of money and time.

I will admit that for most businesses there will be times to do the first, and time to do the second. But I imagine this distribution is something like 20/80, whereas most companies are doing 80/20.

Coding is hard, but so is marketing, accounting, management ... But are your marketing candidates being put through the ringer too? I suspect software engineers are being uniquely hazed.

Peace & Love
Try searching for a news article, using the exact same title, as it's published on let's say... Breitbart. Now tell me that Google do not "hide" sites from it's users.
Last two years of my life was this. Sitting at home with nothing meaningful to do but still having to park my butt in my kids bedroom.
Ask HN: What are your biggest goals for 2022?
Mine are to reach 1k MRR on Hitsnag.com and 1k followers on twitter.
Need a hand getting Donsol running?

Famicom(NES) or Uxn version?
If you never use anything that ties this stuff together (like IAM), then there is practically no point in using AWS at all, it's way too expensive to use as a 'dumb pipe'.

Must cheap providers have crappy networks compared to AWS.
Cal == Berkeley
My use case was for a chatroom without javascript. I wouldn't really recommend it in production though since it makes web browsers think the page is still loading. For example Firefox will have a box it the bottom left saying that it's still loading stuff.
Dude you just sound salty at this point...
Is this the point in your career when you have so much money that you don't actually need a job?
Interesting graphs.

What's interesting in particular is that for several categories (such as ischemic heart disease) the relative risk does seem to go down rather decisively for up to 6(!) standard drinks per day (which they note is "offset" by the increased risk in other categories -- including cancer).

So going by their own combined/weighted risk in Figure 5 - we see a curve that is essentially flat in the region between 0 and 1 - that is, showing negligible risk (asymptotically zero) at 1 drink per day, rising to more concerning levels starting at 2 or 3 per day.

And that's the decisive issue here: "Is having an average of 1 drink per day really any more risky than 0 per day?" The only take-way I can get from the article is that there's essentially no difference in risk level in this interval.
I’ve noticed that as well. I’ve been finding a lot of queries are now leading me to those awful sites that just dump StackOverflow content onto a page and surround it with ads. The original Stack Overflow page is nowhere to be found on the first page, but if I grab a sentence from the spam page and search again, I can normally find the original.
How many companies did he end up applying to? I'm really not sure what is normal. I just applied to 10 companies and did 5 interviews, I heard other people have done hundreds. Or is it best to go 2-3 a month?
Where have you worked where senior engineers do hardly any coding? What else would they do all day?! Are you sure you aren't thinking of project managers?

Everywhere I've worked (mostly large companies) the seniors write much more code than the juniors.
Living with my girlfriend really opened my eyes to how many clothes women go through. She even tries to be responsible about it and sell items to second hand markets, but I still think it’s a bit crazy.

- Women’s fashion cycles much faster then men’s. Office wear is a bit more stable but anything aimed as social settings like weddings may only provide a few opportunities to wear it before it’s out of style. Men can reliably wear a suit for years, but most dresses get only one or two wears.

- Women’s clothes have a much narrower size range. I can gain/lose up to 20lbs and still be in a similar size range. 10lbs for a women means most of her wardrobe no longer fits. Most mens clothes come in 4, maybe 5 sizes. Most womens have at least 6, maybe 8 or even 10 subdivisions. Most sizes are even numbers, so you might find an 8 or a 10, but at smaller sizes you may find 3s and 5s.

- Womens cloths just seem to be flimsier. Delicate fabricates and stitching mean they tear easier. Jeans have high elastic content so they wear our faster. Leggings rip easily. Knits are harder to care for than fleece or sweats.

I’m not trying to justify it, but I think many men, especially those who frequent this forum, probably have closets full of clothes that are 5 or 10 years old. Guys can wear a shirt for years to the point it’s vintage. If a woman does that, she will very often get judged by her peers.
Thank you. A lot of mercenaries here are posting coopium all over this thread.

They just don’t get it, we don’t want them. We believe they’re evil. We see them, and their skills, as a liability and not employable asset.
Performance Summary Cycle- performance reviews every 6 months.
So how do you hire the best people? Seems like most employers focus on name-brand resumes and leetcode. I've never met anyone who does an actual substantial interview.
Pick a Number, Any Number (The Riddler)
For sure. There’s not much of an economical argument for self-hosting—if you’re doing it, it’s almost implied that you’re doing it for fun. Although having run a small (but really scaleable c/o k8s) homelab for <$2/month, I’m not sure I’d save much effort versus using some PaaS or cloud provider now that I know what I’m doing. Like I’d need a real load balancer and a few other things so we’re talking < ~$100/month to productionize.
Germany Blocks Estonia from Transferring Weapons to Ukraine
Many misconceptions in the article. It is a good example of an apples to oranges comparison.

Kubernetes is first and foremost an orchestrator.

Docker is an environment. You can run Redis, proxies and all kind of infrastructure in Docker containers. Or your own binaries.

The article is making a valid point in distributing binaries. That's all. Nothing new here. If WASM will conquer the world - we'll see. Potential is there. But WASM for the browser was already overhyped. Hype seems necessary in our times but is clearly not enough.
Many people don’t use or like conference shirts. Your mileage may vary.
Archive: https://archive.fo/9TzuW
https://archive.is/4cafm
If you can make it into a FAANG/MAMAA/whatever flavor of the year acronym, you can make it into most tech companies (and still make a salary that's more than enough to live a dignified life and support yourself, and family if you have any).

Working at Facebook as a software engineer is a choice; just like working at a bulge bracket investment bank is a choice.

The type of people that choose to work at either of these two are (more likely than not) people who do not have morals or a sense of character and values.

In my experience, being a good person only works when you're interacting with good people. If you're a good person interacting with a "bad" person, you tend to get a worse deal -- and if not alert, will unconsciously "sink" to their level, and start mirroring their behaviors in order to not get a bad deal.

Sooner or later, you're surrounded by "bad" people and have become a "bad" person yourself, simply by moral "osmosis," all because a few "bad" eggs spoiled the quiche.

I have been the type of person that naturally gravitated towards the "money money money" professions, because I did not have any strong role models to build a value system. Now that I'm out of that moral rut, I do not wish to go back. Just like an ex-addict who decides not to associate with other ex-addicts, because the chance of relapsing increases exponentially: I do not want people without any moral compass dragging me back down to their level.

I like the way things are. Things are good. Associating with Facebookers will make things bad. I don't want things to be bad.

I've tried very hard to express this viewpoint, without making value judgements, but it's moot: I have standards for what it means to be a good person, and Facebookers do not meet my standards -- so I won't associate with them. I won't hire them. And I will avoid collaborating with them.
50/50 usually means no child support, if you’re looking for reasons why it’s uncommon.
I wouldn’t mind the payout in years like 2020 where you can’t leave the house. But I’ve been unlimited PTO for about 7-8 years now and probably averaged about 3-4 weeks per year. I’m confident in my output so I take the time.
Yes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X/Open_XA

That being said, I don't think it's a good idea for reasons similar to this: https://wiki.c2.com/?DistributedTransactionsAreEvil vs. using the Saga pattern.
Might be an aside, but I find the word "narcissistic" overused and meaningless when conveyed by people these days.
Do we need to coin the phrase "the Boris Effect", to describe the phenomenon of people being purposefully distracted away from some already-popular information by someone trying to use the Streisand Effect to make some other information seem more important?
I want to produce a keyboard switch which needs no debounce.
Gotta keep the gate somehow. You wanna pull in the big bucks like everybody else on the team? Well? Study those stupid leetcode questions and suffer a day long interview loop first.

It’s hazing. Nothing more.

That being said I’d rather work for a shop that had at least some code tests. I’ve worked in places with none and the code quality is about as shifty as you’d expect.
With your remarks of you’re in control now with all the power and such. Like the other commenter said, this sounds like
Coping and grand standing.
If there's one underappreciated metric today, it's "quality of hour worked." I.e. how productive did you feel about an hour of your work, today?

Track that over time. Make radical changes if it starts plummeting, because otherwise you're going to be backfilling entire teams' worth of vacated roles.
I've also observed this on duckduckgo, perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. Strange: they either both tweaked their algorithms around the same time, or maybe SEO spam suddenly got a lot better.
That’s only true if one is an average size or isn’t mindful of fit. Shopping new can be a huge drag otherwise.
There are always exceptions, of course.

But then again, there's also the Ariane 5.
>> "After 60 days in suspension, you will no longer have access to Google Workspace core services, such as Gmail, Calendar, and Meet. You may still retain access to additional Google services, such as YouTube and Google Photos."

This suggests authentication and external stuff that depends on it will still work.
For me, it's either imposter's syndrome or I just suck. Regardless, I'm worried I won't be able to find a job.
I had clients who were going to bargain for less than a penny