skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think FizzBuzz and other easy questions being asked is a symptom of the opposite issue.

The field of interviewees is so mediocre that if you start with a reasonably difficult interview question a lot of them will flounder and will never get it. When I interview I like asking tiered questions. They build on each other conceptually and get harder.

The first one I ask takes good candidates 10-15 minutes at most. I've had some solve it in 2 minutes. You can write a not-too-ugly 1-liner in Python to solve it. Some candidates spend a full interview on that question and never get it. The question isn't a trick question, it requires a basic knowledge of data structures and directly translates to the (mostly simple) code people write every day. If someone solves this question it basically tells me that they're good enough for the second question, not much else.

But man, is it painful to interview someone who can't answer that first question with a harder problem to start with. I don't know if you've ever interviewed someone who just didn't get it, no matter how many hints you drop, but it is an uncomfortable experience.

That is why we have FizzBuzz. Asking a harder question first to a shockingly large number of candidates is a waste of effort. So we all have to FizzBuzz and then (hopefully) answer some real questions.
To be honest, that's the first time ever in my life to read the description of FizzBuzz, which is ridiculous. But I was just answering the parent and providing a data point that proves the correctness of his statement.

But in general, I find LeetCode style interviewing very boring and dry. Like all of those "Given a string, find a substring that satisfies bla bla condition", or "given a matrix as csv input, read it then calculate some BS and find the best estimation for some other BS, etc".

When I was very young and naive, that might be fine, but at this point in my life, I just get super super bored and annoyed by such questions.

Instead, I prefer contextual questions. Like if you're hiring for a low-level network programmer, let me do some socket stuff in C or Go, implement a backoff mechanism in a given code template, discuss some TCP/IP congestion stuff, discuss some code, add a small feature, put a bunch of system calls and watch how I care about performance (blocking vs non-blocking, epoll vs select, shared-memory vs message-passing, context switching, etc) and how I handle errors, and also observe my workflow, how I check the documentation, the man pages, debugging, etc.

I think this is a much more reliable and less frustrating way of interviewing and I believe it attracts very highly skilled and motivated people.
Other responses here are valid, you do you. On the other hand, if it’s plausible that success comes, and you can decide in four months because you don’t need the change, staying is reasonable.

I’ve stuck with startups where I felt (correctly) that self-preservation was the best course, and left one where I felt (correctly) that it was hopeless, after series D no less. In all these cases, leave was the correct choice. Another was financially precarious for all of its life, and the path out of it was really good when it finally got bought, for the opportunities it led to. So leave for the right reasons, or stick it out.
People still use it as a benchmark. I see products marketed like "Heroku for mobile apps" and the like. It's the gold standard for PaaS even when it doesn't work.
Sitting in cash is not a defensive position, it's offensive and a highly risky one at that. When fiat, is losing 5-6% on average every single year, you can't afford to wait for the right moment to jump into equities. You have to be in it now, whether the valuation suits you or not. This of course exacerbates risk for everyone and forces everyone into risky positions because cash is now more risky than nearly all the other risky bubbles out there.
When I was a kid the badge was called “wilderness survival”. I took it every summer camp because it was so much fun to be sent off into the woods with a bit of food, matches, knife, and rope.
Someone just bought a Florida home for $653,000 through an NFT sale
This is an idea whose time has come.
Subsidies are a big one. All the core aspects of American suburbs have been subsidized for 70 years: oil, autos, highways, single family homes, freight (via highways), service lines. People talk about a free market but there was a great deal of post-war central planning which decided this was the community of the future (Dwight Eisenhower and Robert Moses come to mind but it began as early as Roosevelt). Part of this was the dual-use aspect of oil and auto industries and highways for the military.

strongtowns.org has ongoing research that shows most suburban communities are not self-sustaining as a tax base and rely on nearby cities and outside investment to support their infrastructure.
> There is nothing of worth backing the dollar either

What a ridiculous notion. Uncle Sam has the world's largest economy, the world's reserve currency, and more than a few aircraft carriers. Just to name a few of the backing assets.
I really hope you (or someone else in your interview loop) asks another question besides FizzBuzz.
> The thing about Computer Science nowadays is that the machines are stupidly fast so that a lot of the algorithm stuff is redundant.

Accidentally quadratic is such a thing there's a blog[1], and it's regularly the source of problems of a certain blogger who debugs problems in Windows that are usually causing his "stupidly fast" hardware to run bog slow[2].

Just this week, I hit what seems to be an accidentally-quadratic bug in macOS's tail — tail! I'm not even sure how you write an accidental O(n²) in implementing tail, but yet macOS tail takes 7 minutes to process a log file on my system that GNU tail can process in 80 milliseconds.

Regex regularly lead to oops-O(n²) due to devs not grokking the greedy nature of the star character, and for a while last year it felt like every week some NPM package was getting a security vuln. for a DoS vuln. due to quadratic regexes.

Understanding how B-Trees work — and more importantly, when they don't — in database queries is a perennial source of bugs in every company I've worked at where queries get written that won't hit an index, and don't get noticed until they're hitting production levels of rows. Dev confusion entails — "but the index has the columns I'm querying!" … yes, but that's not how a B-Tree works.

And it's not just the order-notation. I've seen, numerous times, people re-discover topological sort, or worse, hack a solution onto a problem where the problem is a DAG, and the solution is topo-sort, but instead you get something that isn't topo-sort, and just performs worse. Gitlab's CI failed to model CI jobs as a DAG[3], and as a result, will not launch jobs in some cases that can be run when they can be run.

> Sprints

Yeah, these destroy dev's souls.

[1]: https://accidentallyquadratic.tumblr.com/

[2]: https://randomascii.wordpress.com/

[3]: I hear it has been fixed, but I've since left it so I've not had an opportunity. Regardless, the point is that the solution was obvious … if you know the theory. Or even contemporaries, like Make.
As the author, I disagree. It was an expletive-laden sentence against anyone who dares insult the hard working, dedicated, caring, compassionate, and very talented folks who work tirelessly behind the scenes to make Heroku a reality.
I think it's generally useful to assume that depiction isn't necessarily endorsement. Otherwise you risk mistaking Paul Verhoeven's adaptation of Starship Troopers for pro-fascist propaganda or misreading Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale as a blueprint for the ideal American society.
It's important to keep in mind that the vast majority of people who are currently employed had to work through rejections before landing their current role. Meaning that rejections are nothing to fear, they are simply part of the process. So it's important to not internalize a rejection as some deficit in yourself, just understand that it comes with the territory and move on to the next evaluation. The more zen you are about each rejection, the more motivation you will have for the next opportunity, and the quicker you will complete the process.
People who actually hold DAI don't experience liquidation risks. It's the people who create the Collateralized Loan Deposits (CDPs) who are taking that risk, and in exchange, are given DAI.

Also, technically the value of UST was fully backed by LUNA, until the total market cap of LUNA dipped below the market cap of UST, and then it wasn't.

IMO it's not the collateralization that makes something an algorithmic stablecoin, it's the currency is managed entirely by on-chain smart contracts, as opposed to Tether or USDC etc, which are managed manually by humans working in a room somewhere. Who knows though, I just made that definition up. The algorithm that manages DAI is pretty rad, so it seems unfair to deny them the status of "algorithmic", but that's fine.
Hopefully explicit exports with modules in c++20 will solve the include tree problem
it had a 210km range for the first iteration and 1/3 of the model s
https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/news-on-air/news/renault-zoe...
> Synthetics backed by a 1:1 mint/burn are always going to crash and burn the same way.

What are the top few similar synthetics out there right now if you don't mind me asking?
Rigorous interviews are intended to reduce the number of incompetent colleagues and managers. All of those colleagues and managers went through interviews too.

Sometimes candidates prefer rigorous interviews because it means the people inside the company all made it through those same hoops.
It's because in many cases the years of experience doesn't count for much, that's why. The sad truth is I get plenty of resumes from people with 20+ years of experience and when I interview them to see how they actually write code, the code they write is not much different today than it was 20 years ago.

There's a difference between someone who has 20 years of genuine experience, and someone who has 3 years of experience that they've been repeating over and over again, and unfortunately my experience is most people who've been at this job for a long time are simply those who gained a few years of experience until they got to a point of diminishing returns and then allowed their skills to stagnate to the point where a recent grad could easily ramp up to out compete them with about 1 year worth of training and investment.
The digital equivalent of "we screwed up Earth, let's go to Mars and screw things up all over again!"
I visited the link to suggest some missing sites but received a modal I can't get rid of without accepting cookie tracking:

Approve third-party cookies

In development and staging instances, Clerk uses third-party Javascript cookies to manage user sessions. The browser you're using requires us to request explicit permission to use third-party cookies.
This view is slightly wrong when it comes to software. Software is a force multiplier, not a cost reducer.

Sometimes they're the same. Sometimes they aren't. A well placed, smart team of "staff" engineers can increase revenue as much or more than a team of line employees.
>Also, imagining that corporate offices are models of efficiency is an error.

Absolutely!

I used to work for a Fortune 50 company (that shall remain nameless here) and was moving various groups (mostly marketing and research) away from mainframe batch processing (this was the mid 1990s) toward distributed (Unix) systems.

The inefficiency and waste were just unbelievable. The corporation had tried to move their customer service reps off IBM 3270[0] terminals which were locked in to a single application (with significant retraining required for different apps) with X terminals (what they used to call thin clients) that scraped database queries and stored them in a local database and had a unified UI across all apps.

The app was complete, the roll out team purchased ~USD$300,000,000 worth of systems and infrastructure, and then realized that it would cost USD$150,000,000/year to support/maintain the environment.

So the project was canceled, with hundreds of millions of dollars in Unix boxen and related hardware sitting in warehouses, now without a clear purpose.

When moving folks off of the mainframe, we always pushed them to use the hardware already purchased (a sunk cost). All a group needed to to was put the capital depreciation for whatever equipment they used on their budget lines.

The vendor (again who will remain nameless) priced out equipment (on purpose, I'm sure) so it was cheaper (on the budget line) than the depreciation on the equipment the corporation already owned. In every single case, these groups chose to spend real money buying new equipment rather than taking on the depreciation of the equipment already purchased.

What's more, when evangelizing these changes, I was strongly cautioned to never use the phrase "increased productivity," as that (apparently) made the heads of these groups concerned about losing head count.

tl;dr: The corporation was so fractured and inefficient that group heads would waste corporate dollars in the millions just to maintain their budget and headcount.

I'd love to hear about something like that happening at the DMV or other government office. But I won't, because if folks in the public sector pulled shit like that, they'd be hounded out of their departments.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_3270

Edit: Added the missing link.
Not sure that’s the fully correct take. It only had time to fall 30 percent before the FED announced QE infinity which turned it around (FED solved liquidity issues). If that didn’t happen it would have likely fallen further.

Now we are having similar liquidity issues / dollar strength but the FED is not rushing to the rescue.

Context is important
For what it’s worth they were doing the same thing here in May 2020 warning everyone gleefully about how we hadn’t hit the bottom yet.

Maybe they’ll be wrong this time, too. I don’t know.
Just buy e.g. a USB-C -> GPIO extension for your phone.
(Former Herokai) Heroku is beyond the point of recovery at this point (barring a sale to Github or something). Those dedicated engineers need to give up because at this point they're harming everyone:

* The industry – suffering because Heroku holds market share that should go to competitors capable of innovating.

* Customers – suffering because their platform will die but their vendor isn't being transparent about that fact.

* Herokai – suffering because they could be doing something better with their careers, even if it is on another sfdc product.

Make sunset plans now and let customers know what the timeline will look like. "Trust is the #1 value" at sfdc, right?
In the long term, housing should always return to the cost of building it plus the cost of land, that's the long term trend line. Now, why this trend line is increasing so fast is the real reason why housing is so expensive (something no one ever talks about), everything else is just incidental and or temporary effects.
Russia had a lot of dollars, and then suddenly they were worthless or disappeared, despite all the aircraft carriers and delta squad guys the USA has.
zoe was 210km and very cheap, it's mystery why it didn't took off
Stockholm syndrome much?Just leave. Do what’s best for you. They won’t hesitate to can your ass when the money dries up.
What is it about free lipids and proteins spontaneously joining together in chaotic aquatic environments to form highly resilient microscopically sub-dividable shells that you find so trollishly unrelated to the concept of membranes forming in early earth conditions?
>I have no idea how to interview anymore; whatever I say it's either wrong or not enough.

Consider it like dating. It doesn't matter what you say as much as it matters whether or not you're compatible.
Old gear didnt depend on low ESR (simplified resistance at high frequencies). Every time you turn on a piece of electronic with linear power supply electrolytic caps will slowly reform and start working better and better with time. Modern gear is DC-DC converters all the way down. Aged cap means no supply voltage at all (doesnt turn on), or crazy ripple (crashes, produces funny sound or visible artifacts).

>Actually, I wouldn't want a car exhibiting mechanical problems after such a short period.

Nobody would, thats what scheduled services are for.
Absolutely. You won't believe all the crazy stuff that can happen that makes an offer fail when using a mortgage.
The strongest part of the article is piecing together the motivation and purpose behind Pluton:

In order to perhaps peek behind Microsoft's curtain a bit, let us look at what Pluton was designed to accomplish. When Microsoft announced Pluton in 2020, it said, "The Pluton design was introduced as part of the integrated hardware and OS security capabilities in the Xbox One console" [..]

But, what is the source of these physical attacks? Who are the attackers? As stated above, the Pluton design evolved from work done to prevent successful attacks against the Xbox One. Here is what Tony Chen, Xbox One's lead software engineer explained

"I want to talk to you about what we did on Xbox One to guard against physical attacks. [..] Ever since the very first Atari game console, for decades and decades, every game console maker has had their console been hacked such that people can play pirated games. [..] I'm proud to say that the Xbox One, which was shipped in 2013 for the last six years, at least we have not seen any evidence that anyone was able to break it for piracy or cheating"

In sum, it was designed to provide security against the owner. And all the defense of Pluton/TPM rests on persuading you that it won't be used for what it was designed and built for.
> Personally I think that's enough to justify a small market cap and a volatile price

Perhaps for some currency, but why that one?

There's no realistic function for an infinite number of them; there probably isn't a realistic function for more than a very small number of them.
Your argument doesn't match your example? You're saying I should reconsider my ethics until they match with picking up the gun, since the line is made up
White House joins OpenSSF and the Linux Foundation in securing open-source
It isn't about killing him, it's about waking him up. Killing him doesn't matter. If you wake him, he never gets reset, he never goes back to sleep, the warders you have to kill to wake him never spawn again, and they drop the best loot in the game, so by killing them and waking him up, you remove everyone's ability to grind for that loot, forever.

Killing him is a thing that you can only do by using a specific strategy, and doing so has no real effect on anything, he still is awake and you still lose the warders, and therefore the good loot. Since this server is pegged to this specific moment in time when the first two expansions were released, the subsequent content with the better loot will never happen, so now people on this server have lost the ability to get that loot, and they're salty about it.
there is a great wikipedia page for this
"But the early web wasn’t fun in many conventional ways - you couldn’t quite create art there, or use it as much more than a way of sharing documents."

This person needs to go look at some Geocities archives. People were trying to create cool-looking pages as soon as we had the IMG tag. People were using tables to organize a bunch of images in neat ways. People were doing weird little hypertext art things.

They were not using the technology in the "right" way. Nobody gave a shit about the right way. It took something like twenty fucking years for CSS to make it easy to vertically center shit the "right" way after persuading everyone that using tables for anything but tabular data was "wrong". If we waved a magic wand and suddenly everyone just had this theoretical Markdown-centric browser? People would immediately start looking for clever ways to abuse edge cases of its implementation to make their pages pretty. And people would start making enhancement requests, some of which the browser makers would inevitably implement, and... eventually we're right back where we are now.

I am not a fan of the modern corporate-dominated web, neither am I a fan of the modern world where more and more apps are horrible kludges of JS and HTML that have absolutely no care about the UI conventions of their host platforms, and are a couple orders of magnitude more resource-hungry than their equivalents that use native widgets and compiled languages. (Concrete example: Slack's 440 megs on disc, Discord's 370; Ripcord, a native app that talks to them both, is 40.) But thinking people will happily go back to a world with little to no control of the presentation layer after decades of struggle for more of that is a pipe dream. We all quit using Gopher the moment we had a web browser on our systems.
I hate to say it, but the ruble has more than recovered. It's up.
Yes, the price would go down, but there's no way to fully deplete the backing assets as there is with UST/LUNA. Unless iFinex literally says "lol we took all your money and won't be doing any more Tether redemptions", there will still be some people with faith in the system, presumably hoping for partial redemptions.
Let's also not forget that every bitcoin contributes massively to the destruction of our planet. From wasting massive amounts of energy (as much as a modestly sized developed nation) to wasting massive amounts of resources in terms of computing hardware.
I don't see the advantage of circumventing government controls via crypto over the alternative of laundering the money. Or is it that crypto helps with the laundering process?
Ok, we've taken the part where it matters out of the title above. That's a headline cliché anyway.
The US dollar is backed by the sovereignty of the US government, the ability of the US government to impose taxes, and their willingness to accept the US dollar in payment of all tax obligations.

If the Fed used the Bitcoin blockchain as the ledger to settle tax payments, then Bitcoin would be a currency and would have something backing it. However, this would create a horribly deflationary economy which would plunge the country into a period similar to the middle ages in Europe where coin scarcity crippled productivity.
> Russia had a lot of dollars, and then suddenly they were worthless or disappeared

Yes, due to broad international sanctions orchestrated by the U.S. You're unwittingly supporting my point.

If Beijing or Washington ever get around to treating cryptocurrency as an existential threat, make no mistake the market will be crushed and you will lose everything.
Currently it's literally impossible to get rid of for any price, given that Terra have officially halted the blockchain at block 7607789 https://twitter.com/terra_money/status/1524935730308456448

You can't even pay people to take your LUNA - it simply cannot be transferred.