skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> the net-effect of the back-loaded vesting and soaring stock was that we all ended up holding for longer than we otherwise might have which ended up adding nearly another 100%.

+1. Every amazonian i know who stayed at the company a while had crazy good equity because of the holding and stock growth. The historically stable growth really encouraged people to stay longer, and internally people always talked about how much the stock was when they joined. I know plenty of people who cashed out their equity and got houses in seattle area, in cash. Hearing these stories as a young engineer, and old alike really makes you feel compelled to stay and see where it goes for you. If you're young, you want to get in for when it goes up (FOMO), and if you've been there, you want to stay because you've been so well rewarded, and waiting a little longer will get you a bit more money because of refreshes and growth.
Not sure if I understand you right, but sha256 is not invertible, there are a couple of steps where you actually just 'cut off' information that is lost afterwards.
Generally, come up with a set of operations that you want to use that meet your design criteria (fast in hardware, fast in software, fast in SIMD, whatever), then brute-force the instruction order and/or arbitrary constants (rotations) to minimize known attacks and maximize diffusion

e.g. the Chacha20 design document explains the choices made in a fairly high level and easy to understand way: https://cr.yp.to/chacha/chacha-20080128.pdf
Honorary shout-out to JIRA, the product that always makes me think of this line when it login thrashes, or spins out moving a ticket between columns, or starts displaying small portions of inscrutable errors and java stack traces in a tiny dialog box at the top of the screen.
Glad to hear it! Thanks!
I haven't done any interviews since before covid. What resources do people suggest reading in order to prepare? I'm familiar with leetcode but I'm wondering what books I should read besides Cracking the Coding Interview.
Is this headline one of those "trip up a Turing Test contestant" things?

Because if it is I'm a confused app.
Agreed, but the two sources are in agreement. It often feels like Canada is run by two groups: the energy companies on the centre-right, and the oligarchy of media giants on centre-left.

Here we see the media companies pushing Trudeau. We could regain our voting power with something better than FPTP.
This isn’t surprising. The father suspended the constitution (because that’s a thing over there??) over a manufactured panic over terrorists planting bombs in mailbox (Feds later got busted doing it, quite literally red-handed) [0]. He also maintained a close personal friendship with dictators such as Fidel Castro [1] [2], a man of great respect for humans right who didn’t hesitate to round up the gays in labor camps.

Seems like the son is trying to do the same with the truckers.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_controversies_involvin...

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/world/justin-trudeau-castro-e...

[2] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-justin-trudeau-castr...
Wow thats actually a really cool idea. At first I was worried about what would happen if you lose a little piece and they thought of that and seem to have a very generous policy. I'd give it a go but I have a huge backlog of sets to build.
what do you think "40 acres and a mule" means? It's not about commuting.
I appreciate your response, but think I'd have to read more to be nearly as convinced as you. I'm familiar with the critiques you mention, but your conclusion as to the model's merits go beyond what I've seen other critiques make. As a model grounded in theory it is lacking, but as an explanatory construct to predict patterns of behavior and outcomes in specific settings (e.g., knowledge work) it persists for a reason. I've peer reviewed papers criticizing it, but none "debunking" it.

Personally my biggest gripe personally is that it is represented as a model of total personality, but that's definitely not true. It's just just representing a larger "personality space" than most other constructs. At least the outcome isn't placing one into a discrete category.
That's only some stretches of some interior lines; by no means every mile of every line.
foo | None

is not a tolerable replacement for

Maybe(foo)

When None is a valid value of type foo.

Which is obviously true when foo is NoneType, but more to the point is true when foo is (bar | None).

Maybe composes, “... | None” does not.
I wonder how a real self-driving taxi may look like if optimized for size. Something like Smart For Two, with upper part folding inside when not in use by humans. This way it may be stored in a vertical carousel or otherwise optimize available parking space vertically while charging.

I briefly thought about golf cart with folding tent shade above, but it is not that viable: climat control would be too complicated. But it may be actually a lower-grade variant for adequate weather or undemanding passengers.
Thank you for that. I actually did confuse the two! The Tara river [0] and the Tara Canyon [1] are absolutely amazing! To add to the confusion all the mentioned national parks are very close to eachother

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_(river)

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_River_Canyon
PhD really depends on the lab/advisor. Some would let you have experience that directly translates, some won't
Your mileage may very but I only worked 40 hours a week when I was there and I also got promoted in about a year and a half.
Clarifying the rules is not the same as changing them, ask any hermeneutic.

> Also, whether an activity is physical or virtual should be entirely irrelevant

You can hold any belief you want, but there's nothing illegal or immoral about a phone charging fees for one but not the other. It's up to them obviously, and to me personally it makes a ton of sense to make that distinction. A virtual class provided through an app vs something happening in the real world.

I don't know what PWA is so I'm not sure how crucial it is, but if Android has it, that seems like yet another reason for people like you not to have iphones. If you are talking about push notifications in web apps, that's something I have never ever missed.
It does put (a little) pressure on prices, sure. Borrowing money to buy stocks puts a little extra upward pressure on prices. But neither is illegal, neither brings guaranteed profits (naked shorting is regulated so much exactly because of the risks to unrelated market participants if the stock goes up) and neither has the capability to directly harm the underlying company.
But is it provably possible for SHA-256?

An n-bit cryptographic hash function should ideally cover every n-bit output value, given slightly more than n bits of input, but I don't know whether this has been proven for any real-world functions.
Tying UBI to CPI/rental index would quash that dynamic's profit seeking reasonably, I think.
Counterpoint: I found taxis fine.

edit: I also didn't have to announce to the entire world where I go. I could flag one down, get in and tell them where I was going, pay, get out, and end the relationship.

Talk about privacy concerns - Uber execs were literally tracking decisionmakers and enemies in realtime.
Thank you!
Would you mind sharing what other challenges you do see that get in the way of working on your projects? just curious!
At its most basic interpretation, they do scan your emails for spam. That's something I'm perfectly happy letting my email provider do for me.
The original Railway:

https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/rop/

And his 'Against Railway-Oriented Programming':

https://fsharpforfunandprofit.com/posts/against-railway-orie...
I don't even know how we're arguing about whether the job was "really" a "good fit" for the OP or not. They decided it wasn't a good fit, we really want to tell a stranger on the internet that we know better than they that a job they spent 5 months in was a good fit for them after all?

I am finding this whole thread very weird!
The primitive (data) XOR (rotate-data) XOR (rotate-data) is invertible, which means there's no "bit funnel" (Bob Jenkin's term).

You want your "primitives" to be invertible, so that your one source of "non-invertible" operations is controlled very carefully.

Hash functions are non-invertible. But all operations on the "internal state" should be invertible (!!!!) to maximize the entropy per round.

--------

All good hash-functions have invertable operations (aka: a bijective (1-to-1 and onto) operation) over its state to "distribute" the bits around in some manner. You then perform a non-reversable XOR over the input message data (this is the one and only non-reversible step), maybe after operating over the input data somehow.

Whenever you're "mixing" bits around in a cipher or hash, you need every step to be invertible to maximize your entropy. If you have 2^256 possible input states, you want to have 2^256 output states. By the pigeon-hole principle, this only happens if you have a bijective / 1-to-1 and onto invertible operation.

--------

Lets look at the opposite. Lets say we have a non-invertible function. That is, 2^256 possible inputs become only 2^128 outputs. Guess what? We've just lose 128-bits of information (!!!).

It doesn't matter how complex your operation is. If you have 256-bits of input and only 128-bits of output, you've "lost information". You _NEVER_ want to lose internal-state information.

The hash-function's internal state should be at a maximum 256-bits (with 256-bits of entropy) every step. Sure, the input might be 512-bits, 4096-bits, or 100-MBs long, but each "step" of a 256-bit hash should retain 256-bits of state to be maximally "difficult" to reverse.

That's kinda-sorta obvious if you think of it from a pigeon-hole perspective.
Shameless plug: https://blog.johnnyreilly.com

I generally write about tech I'm using; a lot of TypeScript, a lot of Bicep, a lot of Azure at the moment. Essentially anything that intrigues me may get blogged
> like letting someone else sample my food

Just let them do it before you taste it, and then pretend you're royalty and thank them for testing it for poison.
While I enjoy learning stuff that's out of my expertise, I do worry about whether or not being a generalist is more of a hindrance as both the backend and frontend have a LOT of ways one could expand their mastery. There is a bit of zero-sum in this as the hours I spent outside of work learning Go/Rust/Postgres for more understanding of the backend could've been spent on diving deeper into frontend things like performance optimization and web accessibility.
So now every website is doing some type of protest against regulation? It couldn’t possibly be that government is inept when it comes to understanding consequences of their legislation?
not everybody speaks barbarian sir
surburbs are low tax because they are built using bad debt for future generations to bankrupt on.
LEGO Technic is different. I was a vivid user as child and now as adult I rediscovered it. It is indeed more challenging to build inside out (what you need with the new beams/pins) than bottom up (old stackable & studded beams).

I however, would not agree with your statement that this block kids. I think nowadays tinkering is possible with so many more things than when I have been small. I had LEGO and alternatively real tools with wood. Nowadays, you have that and also things like Minecraft, Gravitrax, City Skylines, ..

Also LEGO Technic is too expensive. I luckily bought the 42082 giving me 4000pc for 160€ ... but usually that many pieces would go for 400€. And what I have is a bare minimum to build something meaningful like a robot arm, plotting thingy, some cars, etc. The modern Technic motors/battery hubs are also extremely expensive (ignoring the other flaws).

I think the kids have so many choices that they do not pick up LEGO Technic for the price.
The point is that not every emission can be blamed on the end consumer. Some can and should be, yes, like commercial flights.

Even if every consumer ate vegan and only used a bike, industrial emissions will continue chugging away because the vast majority of those emissions are not serving the end consumer.

We didn't blame the end consumer for CFCs even when they were buying and spraying them into the air in record numbers. CO2 is no different and the blame should not solely reside on us in some hypercapitalistic guilt trip.
I haven't played this game, but I'll definitely add it to my watchlist from this insightful conversation.

I had an interesting experience with friction playing the Retro Bowl (football) and Retro Goal (soccer) games on my iPhone. I don't usually play sports titles, but they build an interesting feeling where you just can't win 'em all. If you are building a franchise, some matches will be impossible to win, so you just need to try your damndest to lose less. While action games will warp you to a checkpoint when you die and roguelikes will bring you back to the beginning, these games give you a penalty and let you proceed. It's a fun procedural narrative when you have an abyssal record, pissed off investors/fans, and a team with great potential, but low morale.

Unfortunately, these games are single player but F2P, so there is a tempting micro-transaction of spending $2/$5/$10+ to get a morale boost or funds. I appreciate the design decisions, but it does make me think the game traps you into failure until you spend some cash.

I had to admit that I spent real money in Retro Goal. I actually justified it by pretending I had to take Qatari funding to keep my Premier League team afloat.
This is based on having spent a year reverse engineering the platform to port Linux to it.

Granted, Apple could've added a hidden secret core with secret firmware we haven't found anywhere, somehow. Of course, so could every other manufacturer. If you are concerned about all potential secret backdoors, you'll have to invest in a chip fab and make your own chips; there is no way to prove that the chip you have in your hands is not uniquely backdoored, no matter what documentation you have or not. Documentation cannot prove that the physical chip matches what was documented.

What I can say is they've done a really good job keeping tight security boundaries in their chips, much better than basically every other manufacturer, by all appearances. What I meant by "secret" in my previous comment was a difficult to observe core with full system access running proprietary code, a la ME or PSP; not literally something that is deliberately hidden so as to be completely undiscoverable. So far, there is no evidence of Apple having added any questionable hardware to these chips.
Polygon Crypto Raises $450M from Sequoia, SoftBank, Galaxy and Tiger
I actually thought for a second this was a joke.
No joke there about how disorganized they are. At one point a couple of years ago I had 3 different recruiters simultaneously reach out to me to work for Audible for the same role. I wonder if their pay is partially commission-based and they have to be so cut-throat, even against fellow recruiters.
I would argue that erb is frontend, but is server side rendered, isn't what he expected, he seems to expected to work purely in javascript, this seems that he things that frontend is only javascript/react, that demonstrates why he was not hired as senior, he lacks of knowledge/experience.
Interesting, thanks for the detailed response. It's fun to listen to Doctorow talk trash but a lot of details get lost in the process.

It will be interesting to see what Uber can do with the position they're in.
A fascinating read. I was unfamiliar with the story of Capa, and found this Wikipedia article [0] on the "surviving" photographs to be interesting in that it mentions the fact that recent research has called into question the legitimacy of the overall story.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magnificent_Eleven
How does this differ from competitors outside of backups being included?
Web3 will turn Internet into Investment Banking
> "While the investors listed above can take care of themselves, unfortunately, invitations to invest were also extended to small-time individual angel investors. Thousands of AngelList members were invited to invest personal checks ranging from $2,000 to $20,000+ via the mailing lists of multiple syndicates."

It's worth noting that any US person investing this way is required to be an accredited investor, which is another way of saying they've proven they can afford to lose that $20k (or whatever they're putting in).

The accredited investor rules in USA seem draconian, but if it weren't for them, we'd be absolutely drowning in fake tech companies taking money from retail investors. (Today those fakes are in crypto, where you can pretend your investment offering is a utility token or maybe a donation to a revolutionary DAO that just happens to issue tradeable crypto-tokens in return, and hide behind pseudonyms to make it harder for SEC to find you eventually.)
Is it a problem that there are only 3 Elixir programs?

Meanwhile —

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...
Or they are pushing more compensation into cash because cash is a lot cheaper for them than equity. What I mean by that is that they have almost unlimited borrowing capacity at near-zero rates, versus a fixed amount of equity, and as long as the equity keeps growing, the cash pool grows with it. If the employees want to then purchase the equity, then that is upward pressure on the price, versus downward pressure on the price when an employee sells equity for cash.
Obviously they make lots of money from the appstore. What's wrong with that?
Couldn't you just freeze all your credit reports and never give Adobe your real name, address, phone number, and they wouldn't be able to affect your credit.

I see Adobe as equivalent to a grocery store, they're just a business and don't have a legal right to any personal information, I could totally manifest to them as an avatar and pay for services with an anonymous Visa gift card.
There are no completely legal marijuana businesses in the US. All of them are in violation of federal law. This is why the money was transferred to a federal agency for the actual asset forfeiture.
But, in your opinion, was it the right thing for US to do? Say you are Truman. You are responsible for US and how it fares on the world stage. What would be the right thing to do? Show trials in Nuremberg will satisfy the public. Useful heads and knowledge at the very least would be prevented from going to Russia, where who knows what they would work on. If Braun was truly apolitical, history timeline could have easily changed.
Only because I'd rather ask and make sure I'm tracking acronyms properly while reading comments:

TC is "Total Compensation" right? As in salary + equity and other benefits and etc? Or does it usually refer to just cash salary?
Tesla recalls 50k+ vehicles over software’s illegal 'rolling stop’ feature
I was reading through the references in https://blogs.umass.edu/comphon/2017/06/15/did-frank-rosenbl... linked in another comment, specifically https://www.gwern.net/docs/ai/1993-olazaran.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/ai/1996-olazaran.pdf by a Mikel Olazaran who spent a while interviewing what looks to be almost all the surviving connectionists & Minsky etc.

Olazaran argues that all the connectionists were perfectly aware of the _Perceptrons_ headline conclusion about single-layer perceptrons being hopelessly linear, which drafts had been circulating for like 4 years beforehand as well, and most regarded it as unimportant (pointing out that humans can't solve the parity of a grid of dots either without painfully counting them out one by one) and having an obvious solution (multiple layers) that they all, Rosenblatt especially, had put a lot of work into trying. The problem was, none of the multi-layer things worked, and people had run out of ideas. So most of the connectionist researchers got sucked away by things that were working at the time (eg the Stanford group was having huge success with adaptive antennas & telephone filters which accidentally come out of their NN work), and funding dried up (for both exogenous political reasons related to military R&D being cut, and just the lack of results compared to alternative research programs like the symbolics approaches which were enjoying their initial flush of success in theorem proving and checkers etc). So when, years later, _Perceptrons_ came out with all of its i's dotted and ts-crossed, it didn't "kill connectionism" because that had already died. What _Perceptrons_ really did was it served as a kind of excuse or Schelling point to make the death 'official' and cement the dominance of the symbolic approaches. Rosenblatt never gave up, but he had already been left high and dry with no more funding and no research community.

Olazaran directly asks several of them whether more funding or work would have helped, and it seems everyone agrees that it would've been useless. The computers just weren't there in the '60s. (One notes that it might have worked in the '70s if anyone had paid attention to the invention of backpropagation, pointing out that Rumelhart et al doing the PDP studies on backprop were using the equivalent of PCs for those studies in the late '80s, so if you were patient you could've done them on minicomputers/mainframes in the '70s. But not the '60s.)
My kids do the same. They get a set, build it, play with it for a while, and then it gets deconstructed and mixed in with the Big Bin O' Lego. Oddball pieces become wings, or arms, or showerheads, or whatever their imagination sees.

To me, that's the spirit of Lego. Even as a kid, I had friends who had, e.g., the Space Shuttle set, and once that shuttle got built, it was sacrosanct. If I tried to pilfer something from it, a blood feud would ensue.
I thought only Civ IV used python.
Because everyone there will move to first available free email alternative. Everyone else can easily pursue the same business model. Instead of gathering data for other services, other providers will build profiles and just target the users with paid email campaigns.
Be careful what you wish for. Increasing the competence of fraudsters will simply make fraud harder to detect.

Had the original theory simply included a "measured" coefficient, the debunking would have been much weaker and never made it into a gotcha story for bystanders to enjoy. This was sloppy from the outset.

What we need isn't stronger technical skills, but strong self-correction mechanisms and incentive structures.

(Ironically, the management consultant who orchestrated this whole ploy is in the field of group psychology - so perhaps it was performance art all along)