skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's some interesting research going on. As of right now it's not really from a software/coding POV that it's interesting, but the mathematics being used and the implications: zero-knowledge proofs are a pretty hot area and have applications for both privacy and data compression. And there is some P2P networks and front ends stuff to be done too, but those are more well-trodden parts of the puzzle. Implementing a cutting edge example of the tech would be similar to working in graphics programming or digital audio; lots of first-principles stuff implemented from papers.

Personally, I just observe the research at some distance and hold tokens. The software side of things is churning immensely as everyone comes up with their own protocol concepts, so there's definitely work to be done.
Yeah, usually we would give a little bit of context, and then look at the sprint tickets in Jira, and take one. The candidate was not expected to be familiar with the codebase or product at all beforehand, and they weren't expected to become an expert on it during the course of the interview. But coming up to speed quickly is one of the skills we liked to see, since that was part of the job.

They should be able to 'hang', in the sense of being familiar with how we approach problem solving as programmers. They should ask questions when needed, and answer questions as they arose. The goal was to just figure out what level they were at in general, and what it would be like to work with them. They weren't expected to come up with the best possible solution, because usually there wasn't a single right solution.

We would ask them questions like "well, you saw the ticket, how do you think we should approach this?" or even just natural things like "this function we just wrote isn't working, what's going on here?". The point is that they are working on real problems — literally real problems — and not abstract CS exercises.

Since we mostly did pair programming every day, the other thing you'd get a sense of is how easy someone is to work with. Not everybody had experience pairing, which is to be expected. You found out quickly who took to it, and who wanted to be a lone wolf. We didn't not hire someone because they weren't good at pairing, but we factored it in. Some people just did not communicate very well, which is a problem.

(This also gave them a good sense of what it would be like to work with us, and sometimes people decided not to take an offer because they didn't like the way we worked: good outcome for everybody)

They would usually do two rounds of this, both on the same day. Morning session, then an afternoon session. We offered to take them to lunch in between, which exposed them to more of the team, and let us talk to them in a more casual setting. Part of the interview would also be a private talk with one of the founders, and an HR person (in a different session).

The people the candidate paired with would provide input like: "I would recommend hiring this person" or not, but didn't make the decision themselves.

Here, I should admit that we did have a set of artificial problems we'd give candidates if we were hiring for a skillset that did not have a real project to test them on. We did both web and mobile contracts at this (consulting) company, so if we were hiring, e.g., an Android dev but didn't have an Android project for them to work on, we'd have them check out a repository and work on a fake ticket instead. Usually this was with a developer beside them, but I can remember times when the candidate had to do it solo.
autocorrect :)
If they’re so interested I have a massive catalog of things that can fulfill such a requirement.
Older, non-tech company with a tech department employee here. And uh, yeah, we do code exercises with candidates. Nothing ridiculous, we just put a basic, relatively straightforward problem in front of the candidate (two notches above fizzbuzz) and ask them to solve it, or at least talk us through how they might solve it.

We've had a problem with candidates who seem impressive on paper and during the first phase of the interview, and then can't solve this exercise without being seen to glance at Google or SO results on camera -- or worse, being caught copying a worked example directly off the web!

There are plenty of people who can talk a good talk about their technology experience but can't write a line of code to save their lives! Entire majors at universities are devoted to this; when I was in college, all the people who couldn't cut it in CS because math, fell back to MIS -- Management Information Systems -- whose courses had big colorful textbooks I call "Richard Scarry books" because they're packed full of busy-looking illustrations. MIS helps you learn about technology in a business context, but prepares you very little for actually doing technology and building the systems with it. The coding exercise helps screen out the people who can't actually do what's needed of a developer.

I guess people reach for leetcode because it's easy, but it misses the point of the coding exercise. The point is to screen out people who can't program at all, not to select for the programming equivalent of NES speedrunners. So it needs to be set at a very low bar and administered by forgiving interviewers.
I'd be interested in how the world would/might react to an American civil war today?

Would we see America's "enemies" sending arms to the side of their choice to fight a proxy war on American soil? Would a side accept that aide?

Would America's "allies" sit out or pick sides? Would those sides align with the sides "enemies" would choose?
> They have a long road ahead of them to shake off the association of being a haven for CSAM and alt-right holdouts.

Considering the first time I even heard that was this very comment, I'd say they're doing pretty well on that front. Basically every nook and cranny of the Internet has had to shake similar associations at some point.
Brain Birth
My dad was a big crossword puzzler. I asked him if he thought that if you pick one of two possible answers to the first clue whether it would be possible to solve the entire puzzle one way or another way. He sat down and created a series of puzzles with "themes", e.g. "north", "south" or "Schiller", "Goethe", where all the major words were from one or the other theme.

Anyway, it would be interesting what the AI would do with this, would there be two hotspots in the solution space, one for each variant?
I’m familiar with the work out of this lab, they fail to realize a couple things.

Vendor lock is real, rarely do resources run in isolation. In organizations, a great amount of work goes into setting up security protocols that are legally defensible. It’s _very_ hard to do this across clouds.

Most cloud abstractions fail because cloud vendors are capitalist entities that get a boost off of lock in. The closest we’ve come is Kubernetes which has managed to get all the clouds on board. This is a rare event, and still has its own limitations.
"you're just saying people are evil!" is a rather banal dodge of the entire thesis of the article, that the system is indeed ineffective and cruel. It's using rules-lawyerism to suppress a point that you find too uncomfortable to address with an actual argument.

Frankly this is sort of a recurring theme on HN, where people tend to lapse into meta-argument or tone argument as a substitute for substantive discussion. It's a matter of degree but at some point these tactics do become a logical fallacy, it's a very enticing way to shut down an argument that you can't directly counter.
It's the politicians with your antigovernment attitude that make these programs so awful. Then they turn around and point at the mess they helped create as the reason they're antigovernment.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamminsky/2022/05/19/if-biden-...
I run a small instance for myself, and there's a certain grim satisfaction in blocking entire instances full of trolls and pedos that can't be matched by the blocking capabilities of other social networks.
> Investments into capital and tech go to the investor, not to you.

I hear what you're saying about investors needing a return on their investment, but investors only exist because modern human society runs on money and the people doing the real work don't have enough of it. Human beings will naturally develop tools and technology with or without money or investors because doing so improves our lives. The problem with our modern world is we are no longer building tools to improve our life, but rather turn a profit. Any "improvements" we've had are merely a side effect of the unnatural need for money rather than a better life. I'd argue we'd see more innovation if people had more free time to innovate rather than waste their lives in corporate slavery.
Sounds like you are pro-immortality!
Welfare policies don't have to be stupid, now do they?
Surely this is a consequence of management and corporate ideology, rather than a natural outcome of having some arbitrary number of devs in a room. A good project manager doesn't allow great ideas to die on the vine unless there is pressure to do so, and that pressure is not coming from the team or customers -- it's coming from the top of the company.

For all of his and Apple's faults, Jobs aggressively fostered a culture of "good is the enemy of perfect," which placed the focus on polished features instead of the dull hum of incremental development. And that bucking of homogenization is what led to such a rabid base of loyalists, as consumers tuned in to that momentum of (albeit perceived) innovation.

Google, on the other hand, has never really had a fan base to speak of, and the few remaining loyalists are rapidly disappearing. I genuinely have never met a consumer or dev who believes Google is at the bleeding edge of any feature. That is wholly reflective of Page and Brin's ideologies, who fostered a culture of "over-engineer, refactor and ship incomplete," which is exactly what you're describing. Angular, for example, is the perfect representation of the Page/Brin ideology, and that's why nobody uses it.
> Shippers keep building extreme size vessels, requiring local governments to dredge and increase roadway infrastructure to handle the added throughput

I would think consumer demand requires larger throughput, and that requires larger infra.

If ships doubled in size but demand didn’t go up ports would handle half the number of ships each time period, and roads would get non the busier.
You should consider using something other than pip to distribute an installer for the Pro version.
A public gallery is very much on the roadmap, right now you can export and import projects as .json files and there are some examples you can import, the ui is a bit rough though...

I definitely want Plantarium to accommodate users who just want to play around, so that is valuable feedback!
It's actually super easy to do. See, you just...make sure that rather than cliffs, you have percentage based reduction of benefits. I.e., you lose $1 of benefit for every $2 you make, or whatever. And something similar with assets (though admittedly the details would be trickier to avoid it being gamed).

Neither the group that needs help (and their supporters), nor the group that doesn't want to give hands out to people who refuse to work but could, have reason to object to something like that.

The actual problem is the red meat that welfare/socialism is to our political bases in the US, and the incentives of politicians, on both sides of the aisle, to ensure it persists. If you do the obvious thing to actually address the problem, neither side can use it any longer to stir up the base. So the incentive is to not actually fix it.
Update to Windows Subsystem for Android on Windows 11
The 9th amendment...

This argument proves too much. One might say, for example, that the right to crush annoying smartphones isn't specifically addressed in the constitution or amendments thereof, and thus we must have that right. However, the states do have laws against theft, vandalism, etc. so we don't actually have the right to crush any smartphones that annoy us. The way to preempt those state laws would be with a federal law establishing such a right.

I am pro-choice, but such a federal law addressing abortion could have been passed at any point in the decades since (or before?) Roe. My understanding of the leaked ruling is that it would be overruled by such codification.

The weakness of the appeal to 9A explains why Roe itself did not rely on that.
"Discredit Fusion"

When you ain't got nothing , you got nothing to lose...Fusion has been the running joke ever since the mid 80s.

For sure in the 90s it became known as the technology which would always be "20 years away".

ITER is miles ahead in terms of taxpayers funds risk-reward as far as international project go if it's compared to the ISS or the LHC. Odds to get something practical out of it are at least an order of magnitude more than the ISS and the LHC
Funny, for me it always seemed that Mastodon has always be associated with the left/identity-politics/SJWs/progressives and Pleroma was chosen by the alt-right/shitposters/incels.
The reality is that's only from one super limited perspective and fails to consider the ideals of the applicant and how they think companies should operate ethically. Becoming wealthy isn't the only thing in life, this includes considering which companies you're willing to work for based on how they operate and what they do.

If we constantly have people buying into a damaging system just for the money, it compounds issues and they get worse down the road
Microsoft was one of the first big tech companies to popularize these styles of white board coding interviews. Back when I was in college, Google had just lowered their hiring bar from "must have PhD" to "well BS from an Ivy League may be good enough", CTCI was seen as a way into Amazon and Microsoft.
NodeList.prototype.filter = Array.prototype.filter;

and you can querySelectorAll('...').filter(el => ...) without any copies.

ditto for other mentioned functions. Prototypal nature of Javascript is there for a reason.
Right, I'm assuming collateralization by bank accounts, money market accounts, and short term Treasuries. Not commercial paper issued by Binance and Bitfinex.
Yeah, but it won't ever happen because it lays bare the function of taxation as (mostly -- sin taxes and virtue credits being the exception) the vehicle for a wealth transfer from rich to poor. And if we actually admit that then we have to deal with the awkwardness that is why even bother taxing people below the breakeven point?
>Would we see America's "enemies" sending arms to the side of their choice to fight a proxy war on American soil? Would a side accept that aide?

If history is any indication, yes and yes.
It’s easy to pass blame; harder to realize that we are the people who are supposed to fix it.
"they".. Really on the fediverse it's very much on an instance by instance basis. really it's like saying that email is a haven for some group or other. Don't shoot the protocol!
Exactly. It's a reasoning error.

They equate "Ensuring any recalled products remains off market" with "keeping formula off the market".

As you said, there are many cases in which it is far wiser stop to ensure safety, than to move forward with risk.

Well said.
"more accurate"? The rationale for (typically expensive) tracing in HPC circles is that sampling can miss things you want to pick up. I think that's also covered in the vi-hps.org workshop introductions, for instance. (It doesn't necessarily involve recompilation.)
You can also break trust by loudly and persistently exaggerating the prevalence of abuse in the system.
There's an old saying about online headlines: If the headline asks a question, the answer is always no. If the answer were yes, the headline would say so.
Amazon’s updating the foundation of Fire OS to something a bit more modern
I just found out that my new phone can't pair to my 10 year old car anymore. I googled it and it may or may not be a new version of the protocol that's incompatible with my car. I might have to go see whether my car has an AUX input, since I never take calls in the car anyways...
>in, … 12.3 years…, half of the tritium available today will have decayed into helium-3.

When I saw this, I thought that sounded odd, shouldn’t the atomic number go down with radioactive decay? but it turns out that in this case what happens is one of the neutrons splits into a proton, an electron and an electron neutrino so the atomic number goes up by one (unlike the more familiar fission reactions of the heavier elements where the atomic number decreases). So much physics I’ve either forgotten or never learned.
I think you make an excellent point that fusion research is underfunded. NASA budget since the 50s is ~$1,400 billion — almost 30x what’s been put into fusion research. We’re asking fusion research to produce “free, clean, and carbon-free base-load electricity forever.” Seems worth a NASA-level of investment to me.
I get the sense that something has changed about the NY Times approach to journalism. Instead of uncovering, breaking, and headlining news - what they were famous for and world leaders at, 'all the news that's fit to print' - it's long explanatory articles and narratives, and lifestyle stuff, plus their take on well-known stories but not so revelatory. It's less inflammatory, which is valuable, but I don't feel like it's news - shining light on the dark corners of power - which is an enormous loss. I'm not sure how to characterize it because I'm not sure what they are doing.

Has anyone else noticed? It seems like it's been going on since last autumn, at least.
Eh. Why should the jump from Section 8 (subsidized rent) be straight to home ownership (and not renting with your own income)?

Section 8 might have some inefficient cliffs. But not allowing savings for a mortgage doesn’t strike me as one of them.
Do we have a timeline for when the first revenue flight would be?
That's quite the employment program you're proposing.
And yet, when the Democrats control Congress and the presidency (like they do now, like they did in 2010), they do absolutely nothing to show us how wonderful their programs could be -- if only they had control!

Government programs don't need Republicans to add the dysfunction.
I normally remove the bowl when I microwave just to be safe.
Do economists and politologist not acknowledge the problem?
That's way less of a problem. It's not great when half a raise goes to rent and half goes into your pocket, but it doesn't hold a candle to policies where the entire raise disappears or you actually end up with less money.

And a situation like that definitely won't stop you from saving money. It doesn't trap you. If a wage increase takes your payment from significantly below market rent up to market rent, you'll be able to save up a security deposit and moving expenses pretty quickly.

Lower the percentage some or make it a third of net income and it sounds like a pretty great system.
Don't put 100 people in a room. Put 4 or 5 in a room max.

You need a feedback loop to sanity check features some how, but you also need vision and the courage to release stuff that not everybody wants. Every good product I've worked on has had team members who thought the newest features were stupid. Too bad, you aren't the target audience, get over it.

Accept that you'll be releasing features that are either wildly liked or hated. You are going to be hitting both ends of the bell curve more often this way, embrace and accept it.
Direct Persistent Volumes for Kubernetes Storage
This is a horrible policy, but it seems there is a possible solution (for people with good enough credit, which means the most vulnerable people cannot do this):

Get a mortgage on house that will take a while to pay off.

In order to “save” you pay extra towards the mortgage

In order to “withdraw” money (if needed) you take out a small loan against the house

Some bank should make a mobile app which does this, in combination with Zelle.

SuperHomeSaverApp

With free instant transfer between your bank accounts and home
I blame the speed of change - there is too many moving parts (libraries) that are developed without some central oversight or coordination. All 90's RAD tools were created by gigantic IT corporations with top down management that was able to control the rate of change.

Building RAD tools on modern web stacks is like building castles on quick sands - no one is quick enough to keep up...
My brother is on disability, and has an ABLE account so that my family can give him some money above the disability funds.

His handicap is not physical, and he is not capable of doing the reporting himself, and he is often unpleasant. So I spend several hours a month dealing with his wadded up receipts to document every ABLE expense. It's invasive and humiliating for him, and a huge burden for me.
> The people in positions of power want her dead

As a family member of somebody in that position, I can understand that it's easy to have that kind of emotional perception.

However, as a logical matter, I can see how it is easy to make the exact opposite argument to yours. The government doesn't want to eliminate people who might be viewed as drains of resources. They want votes and voting demographics they can pander to. They want social issues they can shovel more money at and sneak some extra cash to their chosen friends. They want to hire tons of officials to oversee implementations for solutions to increase their fiefdoms and influence. They want a compliant voting block that is depending on them for just enough resources to survive so they'll be less likely to ever be non-compliant with any decrees.
The "new CLI utilities" aren't solving new problems. They are solving old problems with a different user experience, driven by changes in how folks do development (particularly the scales).

Notice that I said "different" UX and not "better" UX. Reasonable people can disagree about whether the newer tools have better UX as an objective fact. Many folks very rightly find it very surprising that these tools will skip over things automatically by default. What is true, however, is that there are a lot of people who do see the UX of these tools as better for them.

As the author of ripgrep, I hear the same thing over and over again: ripgrep replaced their ~/bin grep wrapper with a bunch of --exclude rules that filtered out files they didn't want to search. Because if you don't do that, a simple 'grep -r' can take a really fucking long time to run if you're working on a big project. And guess what: a lot of programmers these days work on big projects. (See previous comment about changes in scale.) So you don't really have a choice: you either write a wrapper around grep so that it doesn't take forever, or you use a "smarter" tool that utilizes existing information (gitignore) to effectively do that for you. That smarter tool typically comes with other improvements, because your simple "grep wrapper" probably doesn't use all of the cores on your machine. It could, but it probably doesn't. So when you switch over, it's like fucking magic: it does what you wanted and it does it better than your wrapper. Boom. Throw away that wrapper and you're good to go. That's what I did anyway. (I had several grep wrappers before I wrote ripgrep.)

Every time these tools are discussed here, people say the same thing: "I don't see the point." It's a failure of imagination to look beyond your own use cases. If all you ever work on are smaller projects, then you're never going to care about the perf difference between ripgrep and grep. ripgrep has other improvements/changes, but nearly all of them are more niche than the UX changes and the perf improvements.
VICE: Money and Drugs keep going missing after Louisville Police Raids
I think this style of interviewing also serves as a proxy for age discrimination and/or to detect personal work/life balance values that don't favor the prospective employer.

If you aren't willing to dedicate a considerable part of your unpaid, personal time to an activity that they mandate, you aren't a good fit for them.