skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I will add that these types tend to amass deep expertise in what they do as well, because they're not just "passing through" the responsibilities - it's their craft.

They are incredible teammates and, in my experience, contribute more than "their share" to the mission.
Show HN: Commandline, a C++ library for async terminal I/O
> simplifying problems

Practice rewriting personal projects. Once you have a working app, try to make it even simpler, clearer, more efficient, etc.

> managing time

If you’re on a tight deadline do the easy stuff first and if you’re falling behind get help with the harder parts or ask the team to scale back the scope. But if you bite off more than you can chew you run the risk of having nothing to show for it.

If you’re building a proof of concept, then start with the hard parts to show the team that it’s possible and worth additional time to finish it off.

> overselling their skills

Be honest about your role in a project. Don’t hide the fact that another dev was doing the primary research or making the technical decisions. Just take credit for the things you did from start to finish, without help (because those people that helped might not be there at your next job).
Don't see anything special visiting the page... maybe country-specific? (connecting from Switzerland)
> I guess they just can't figure out a good way to cover the screw holes.

You can’t be serious?
Homework, you say?

I've walked out on interviews that demanded this sort of homework before. I told them 'professionally' that their idea of demanding 4h of my time after 3 rounds was farcical and insulting.

Ditch the homework completely, or tell about the homework up front. Compensate - I don't work for free. And if you want a fair assessment, put me in contact with 1 of your engineers or devs and lets talk out a problem. Or review my body of work in that thing called a "resume".

If you have multiple bad hires that lied about skills they didn't have, then perhaps you ought to reconsider who is doing the hiring decisions. That's been a big one in previous orgs I've worked in. The hiring group was static, upper managerial level, and didn't understand the problem domains of the positions they were hiring for.
Stop War on Ukraine via Your Site
Height (bottom position): 18.8 inches (47.9 cm)
Height (top position): 23.0 inches (58.3 cm)

Top to bottom travel: 4.2 inches (10.4 cm)

Travel cost: 95.24 $/inch (38.46 $/cm)
> I don't plan on doing such a thing again unless I'm compensated fair market rates.

That's entirely fair, IMO. Once you're past the "prove you can code at all" step, being compensated for doing work is legitimate.
How do you calculate this „much more expensive“? I do not think this is correct estimate.
Thank you. I always click on the GitHub links, and they are really extremely revealing. If you just send me your GitHub and it's good, then you're in the next round.
If you're familiar with the polls, you should also know that this issue is more complicated than how you're portraying it. The status quo isn't miserable so it's unsurprising that many people want to avoid forcing changes which have potentially disastrous downsides. That makes it important to specify exactly which polls you're referring to and what the options are.

Here's a good chart to consider for the history percentages of people who identify as Taiwanese rather than Chinese or both. Clearly that has been moving solidly in the direction of an independent identity:

https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6961/People202112.jpg

(Source: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7800&id=6961)

Now, here's the chart from polls looking at what people want:

https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6963/Tondu202112.jpg

(Source: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7801&id=6963)

That shows a more complicated position: support for either immediate unification or independence has been a minority position for a long time but “maintain status quo, move towards independence” has grown from ~8% to 25% with a notable spike starting in 2019 and a decline in both “maintain status quo, decide at later date” and “maintain status quo, move toward unification”.
No, even for an engineering slide this is apalling

I'm not so sure how many people are familiar with the term "conservatism" as used here. I'm not. Some might be aware, those who are not aware will just skip over

I read this slide a couple of times. There's no thought order, no connection between the topics (even if we assume people are familiar with the subject) and several typos.

It is not a Powerpoint fault it is a fault of whoever wrote this.

This is an issue with information hierarchy. If this is a risk (and I can't imagine what might have been a bigger risk at that mission) it needs to be brought into attention. Not added to line 4 of slide 7 and be done with it.
It is probably different where you are but what would actually happen is that it would take you at least 3 months to work out they can't do the job (they are probably not terrible just not good enough) by which time you have lost 3 months and perhaps $20K recruiters fee and now have to start the search again.

Of the people I have interviewed in the UK for "Senior .Net Developer", I would say that 75% did not meet the grade and that was with face-to-face interviews that took a lot of my time. An exam isn't perfect but if someone can't answer a reasonable spread of questions to a half-decent degree, then I don't want to hire them and it saves me hours of my time. Sorry.
When something is ridiculously expensive, it’s usually because you’re not the target customer. I’m a programmer and my I’ve had hard times explaining to my wife why did I need a $300 keyboard. I guess no one here would complain about $300 mechanical keyboard.
Is Elden Ring that hard? Well, it depends what you mean by “hard”
https://archive.ph/hyaS2
Ukrainians have won the information war: historian Margaret MacMillan
This is just what I mean, yes.

A friend told me last night that he thinks there's really a lot of generic resistance to the idea of using thunderbolt in this way, and that is what makes the Mac Pro necessary.

Reading more replies I think it's also clear that people still question Apple's GPU claims, and maybe there is more of a market for whatever-PCI-bus GPU cards.

Moreover I think if you look at the Mac Studio, it is difficult to imagine Apple thinking that a straightforward M1/M2 cheese grater is a remotely satisfactory product design.

But I've been told enough times that I am wrong, (albeit by people who were blown away by a keynote -- am I just old?) that I'm cheerfully willing to admit that I probably will be.
This just isn't true. There's still tons of yellow cabs in NYC. And you know what had the most terrible taxi experience, yellow cabs. I've never been unable to pay via card in an uber/lyft. I've never had my driver pull the emergency brake and tell me his car is broken because I said I lived in Brooklyn and they didn't want to drive there in a uber/lyft. I never had the AC be not working or refused to be used in an uber/lyft.

And yet all of those things happened in yellow cabs and much more. Yellow cabs are truly terrible experience. And they were never far cheaper.
This story is so strange to me. I get that if you read the papers and whatnot, you could think this.

But the charge of "low-quality" is just gobsmackingly daft in the face of the real life experience of people who use this stuff everyday. It may not have some of the bells and whistles, but it works. Every day.

The only "low-quality" I see is the struggles of the poor everyday folks in the Windows world who consistently have to deal with waking up in the morning once in a while and finding that Windows (or one of the big app makers like Adobe) has unilaterally decided to change or break your workflow and there's practically nothing you can do about it.
If you allowed deleting the pre-installed apps entirely, rather than just disabling them, the device could no longer be factory-reset to the original state. That's not acceptable.
Interviewing people sucks. It's so hard to gauge the competence of a person in 45 minutes. Good code tests are a decent, standardized way of getting a read on a person. They are more fair and suffer less from the "confidence = competence" fallacy.

My experience has been that good coding challenges correlate strongly with good team members. It absolutely filters out good candidates on occasion, but it also filters out ones that can't code too.

From my perspective as a candidate. I just pay attention to what the recruiter says their interview process will be, and brush up on relevant skills.
This doesn't sound like a normal decision, but a rather big one. Also, after 9,999 decisions, I'd expect you to be pretty good at picking out what's important.
In my dreams I manage a locally-hosted Matrix homeserver in our company's VPN. (We're not big.)

They just added voice calls via web UI. Not E2EE yet but if you're on an encrypted VPN then that's kinda moot anyway.
Details:

> Help Ukraine - add ribbon with Ukraine flag into the website you manage, show the anti-war message to Russian users, or block them from your service.

[0] https://github.com/hejny/Ukraine#readme
It’s not the actions of a few when compared to the positive hire result. Typical ratios are 1 in 100 to 400 for an SDE position. If 2% of people lie, in both cases that’s a significant number of people relative to a positive hire event.

Firing people is not as easy as you think in many places. Also, managers are human. Accusing someone of lying and going through the termination process is mentally taxing!

If a simple screen takes twenty minutes of time, it’s rational to do. If people get offended and aren’t empathetic to why you’d do this, would you really want to be on a team with them?
That doesn't clarify anything to me but I am curious, how do musicians mature / their interactions change?
The history of these African nations has always been, and will forever be, rule by a strongman. Better that they are aligned with the West, than China.
> Every design failure starts with an engineer hand-waving how something bad won't/can't happen.

Yes, but the converse is not true: when one <hand-waves how something bad won't/can't happen>, it does not necessarily mean that <there will be a design failure>.

You are trying to say that act A causes consequence B because many instances of B correlate with A. That is not sound.
The cycle count is largely irrelevant in a speculative, pipelined core, as long as it can speculate far enough ahead that the delay is masked by other activity. 4-5 cycles is nothing in the scheme of things.
It takes time to hire someone and once you do you of course stop interviewing other candidates. Then when the person joins you typically don’t know immediately what the problem is, then once they’re gone you have to start the search all over again.

Much better to get someone qualified in the first place.

I typically use a small coding test, but not even as elaborate as described in this post — more like a 10 or 15 minute discussion/problem just to see if they really do know what std::string is or how to use an op amp or whatever. Some people can really bullshit well. Consider this the simple “do they know which end of the knife to grab when picking one up?” test.

Once that is clear, a conversation (usually just a conversation about a hypothetical problem) works well.

I don’t understand the coding tests that test your tools knowledge btw. If you know how to think and are somewhat familiar with the appropriate language then you can pick up the specific tools and frameworks. We hire for the long term so said tools and frameworks will change anyway.
Mea culpa!

I focused on reading "Cormac McCarthy's tips" and missed that they'd been regurgitated by others. Sort of diminishes the whole point of reading it!

Thank you!
They were approved by the UK Financial Conduct Authority. That surely takes some serious legal effort and attention to detail.

Also, their About Us page suggests that they are staffed by people from relevant financial services companies. Plus they are backed by some VCs who would not take risks by handing money to a company if they thought the legal side wasn't up to par.

We don't know why there wasn't an annoying cookie popup. So assuming that the company in general plays "fast and loose" doesn't seem warranted.
Thanks for the comment! Yes, texturing is a manual step using a small widget we've built. We do the fill monochrome for the different parts of the model. It's easy to do because of how the model is generated formed by different parts. Then, as it enters the game environment, it's affected by lighting too.

Yes, that is correct in the majority. The focus is games/apps with high volume, low detail. However, we can also do higher detail/resolution and some of our customers are PC and console studios and they use it for prototyping, blocking out scenes, iteration.

Our website and this video feature some higher detail models:
https://youtu.be/jSZ7RMq5EKA
Do you do the coding test as a take home exercise or something done in your office?
I agree with you, but to be charitable, this was a real-time and evolving situation where I'm willing to bet the slide was expected to be finished "yesterday"
Yes, I think people absolutely will buy less from Amazon if the mobile experience is just a bit slower or more annoying. We know from both other companies and Amazon's behavior that reducing friction has substantial impact on amount purchased.
Show HN: Browser extension to quickly open/add bookmarks via keywords like a CLI
Personally, I find the algos interview to be the bullshit one. I've lost track of the number of people we've interviewed and hired that do well on it and then once they are working for us go ahead and design unnecessarily distributed systems (i.e. split some functionality across two or more services when there wasn't a scaling requirement that necessitated splitting things up) and thought nothing of all the extra CPU and memory that was now going to be used on serialization/deserialization between those two services and that's before you consider to all the added incidental complexity from (1) separate deploys, (2) separate on-call shifts, (3) separate logs and metrics, (4) more complicated migrations of interfaces between them, (5) increased complexity in testing that the services work correctly together, etc.

In the last 7.5 years in my current role, I have yet to apply much if anything I needed to study for the algos interview for this role. I get that some adjacent roles in the company might occasionally need this stuff, but it's used rarely enough that it's a better skillset to be able to find the algo you need when you need it then study to be able to conjure one on demand only to have that knowledge atrophy while on the job.
I don't think inherently large apps like games would be a problem on paper. Your game is competing against similarly sized games, not, say, a todo list app.
I, personally, agree with your assessment of the post being a wumaodang, but I've been incorrect on that front before (and corrected by dang himself, who had done previous investigation into the account I was concerned about), and so in the spirit of the HN guidelines "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, bots, brigading, foreign agents and the like." I think it might be best to elide that particular statement...

...which doesn't invalidate the rest of your comment, at all.
Finding Scala Libraries
Trial periods are pretty common in Europe, we call it "probation" in the UK but it is hard to objectively decide if someone is up to the job. If they are terrible or brilliant, it's not a problem but in the middle, I don't want to pay some new person £20K more than another dev just because they asked for it and aren't bad enough to be fired.

Until there is something quite objective about measuring performance against some kind of qualifications, then it is in danger of being more to do with personality than genuine value.
The first step they went wrong is using a slideshow in the first place. This was a time critical scenario, anyone who needed to be making decisions should have been part of the engineering discussions from the beginning. They should have been having interactive conversations going over what they knew and how they knew it. The engineers had no time to be making slides for a management and that wasn't interested enough to be in the room with them in the first place.

Slides make sense as a way to introduce the outline of concept to a broad audience in a way that requires much less effort than 1-on-1 discussions. They are not a means for coming to decisions. If you need to make a critical, life- and business-shaping decision off the back of a side deck, you should instead delegate the decision to someone who knows more than you.
LoudEye?

They had a cool office and a massive SGI machine.
After some Googling, soundfonts was the word, which I suppose would be synthesized into sound.
Essentialism is a bit of a faux pas nowadays, FYI.
Oh yeah uh... sorry about the Rainbow Warrior. And don't let any DGSE agent anywhere near those two boats of yours.
This is absolutely not the situation that he has presented it as. Someone else has already stated what is going on here. These people do not identify as a slur. His entire argument hinges on this insane idea that people identify as a slur.

Reclaiming != identifying as.

The person you're defending even went on to say that his mentality has gotten him into hot water. The fact that you didn't read into that as "I have no idea what I'm talking about and these people clearly didn't want to be called this" is disconcerting.

And yes, if you are not a person of color and you use a slur traditionally used to describe a person of color to describe or talk about a person of color, you are racist. Full stop. The very fact that you're concocting some outlandish situation where you'd magically be allowed to use slurs is extremely telling, though. If you had any idea what you were talking about, you wouldn't ask that.

Maybe you should stop opining on things and listen to the parties these things affect. The usage of slurs isn't yours to have an opinion on if the slurs aren't words for you.
Thank you for writing such a thorough comment. So often people comment on HN without a basis in any of these facts.

I think it’s important to add that Taiwan, like China, was an authoritarian state up until the 90s. The shift to democracy since then has given room for a lot of these different factions to take hold and develop on the island.
If you hit the "Search instead for worldle" it works. Still NYT are smiling at the "wisdom" of Google.
That's exactly the point I wanted to make. Which is why there's no need to fear for OSS - there will be plenty to develop it anyways.
If those tests actually filtered out incompetent programmers, I'd say they were great, but my experience is that they all test very shallow knowledge that doesn't relate to ability to produce software that performs under load.

If you could come up with such a test, it ought to just be used as a standard for everybody to take.

And yes, as unpopular an opinion as it is around here, I'd love to see a "bar exam"/licensing board for software developers.
The Samsung phones are waterproof, I have seen it accidentally tested.

I love my iPhone but, I really think it's no coincidence the headphone jack removal coincided with the release of airpods, just over a year and a half after the purchase of beats by Dre.
It's also worth noting that science funding in the US government is decentralized. Each branch of the military as well as a half dozen "civilian" departments each have their own separate programs for funding basic science research. If I recall correctly, when I was an undergraduate research assistant working for a cognitive psychologist studying how humans solve the traveling salesman problem, that research was funded by the US Navy.

So the DOD funding research could mean it thought the research could mean it had potential as a weapon, or a defense against weapons, or was just a random thing being funded to promote basic science research.

You can't really draw a line from "This was funded by this department, so it had this intent" in US science funding.
In fact you can. With no other formal agreement in place, any cooperative venture is an equally-owned "general partnership", and no partner can legally do anything to diminish another's ownership. And all business debts, however they are incurred, are shared equally too.

Source: been there, twice. Now I keep a boilerplate partnership agreement form URL bookmarked on my phone...
> The title is saying we need to be careful because a tile was likely penetrated.

It is a godawfull title. I believe that is how it reads to you but it totally reads the opposite to me. I read the title and it translates in my head as “we reviewed the test results and they suggest that the tiles are built sturdy enough to not get penetrated”. Exactly because what you say the word “conservatism” means to me that a system is designed to meet the loads plus reasonable safety margin. So if the review of test data indicates conservatism that means to me that the test found the test object roboust even with a reasonable safety margin. Otherwise i wouldn’t say that it “indicates conservatism” but that it “indicates lack of safety margin”.

> The reason the slide is laid out the way it is, is because it's describing the thought process

I agree, but that is not a good thing. People think in all kind of haphazard ways, before you communicate to others it is on you to look at your ramblings and make it orderly. The penultimate sentence is the most important one that should go first “flight conditions is significantly outside of test database”. That doesn’t mean that the tile is broken, nor does it mean that it is not broken. It means that we can’t tell from our tests.
This very precise description is still just a model and will in all likelihood be improved or even replaced one day as well.
Pilots have licenses and documented flying time. Perhaps there's something to be learned from that profession?
It provided valuable data points for a denser mapping of the possibility space!

At the beginning various strategies were proposed. A few looked utterly bizarre: IIRC the UK plan was to "keep the schools open so the kid can catch it".

In retrospect, some start standing out as better - but data is still coming so it's too early to say for sure.
If someone says they are a senior dev, why can’t the HM just contact a few references to confirm? Surely that’s a better signal than a 60 minute coding test. I hate how dev hiring has thrown out references as a tool.
I feel like it's all about the misguided notion of writers/reporters "adding something" to what happened. They are trying to enrich the raw story with their own style leading to this mess.
In which country firing someone on probation would result in any legal issues?
I had no problem firing people in Germany where labor laws are quite strict.
Insulted? Never. Annoyed? Many times, yes. It really depends on the type of test. If they give me the "this should take 4 hours" project, I usually tell them to take a hike because that's very disrespectful of my time and the 4 hours is complete bullshit if one is trying to deliver a perfect result. Coding puzzles are extremely annoying, but I can usually get through them.

The best coding tests are those that demonstrate you know how to code applications relevant to the job; e.g. a UI component or an API endpoint that takes a parameter and body and returns a filtered result. Then the test is followed up with discussions around what else could be done with it in the real world (auth, performance enhancements, etc.). Seemingly this would be the easiest and most rational path for both interviewer and interviewee, so I'm not sure why the industry is still stuck on those stupid puzzle exams.

"We can't find any good devs". No, your hiring method sucks and you're eliminating good devs because of it.
Two Crucial Skills for Engineering Managers