skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, some places do leetcode... and then they ask if you have a degree.
Right, but the GPL compliance issue (presumably) only applies to the Linux kernel part.
Sounds like a path to escalating amounts of social anxiety and loneliness.

If you cheat your way through life, what do you do when you’re 40 and no longer cute & full of potential? You don’t trust anybody and nobody trusts you.
There’s cool cryptography going on in Ethereum, but it’s not helping economize anything useful. At some point you have to notice that all of the “cool new stuff” in Ethereum for the last 7 years all seems to disappear once greater fool liquidity has been exhausted.

Meanwhile adtech is making the internet awful, and thus stories increasingly show up about how bad Google has been getting as well.

I used to read all the white papers for all the new coins, and was definitely on the side of Ethereum as an interesting experiment when it released, but nothing has happened to make me think a premined securities play hasn’t turned out to be a scam.
Sorry but that is nonsense. The Carbon Credits have nothing to do with swappable batteries.

They got some money to demonstrate the technology and they did. They never committed or were required rolling this technology out on a large scale. And it was really not that much money.

If that is the example you go to, you are really deep in the barrel to come up with something.
I think a lot of people here are missing the root cause of why students cheat.

College for the longest time has not had anything to do with learning for the VAST majority of students. You go to college because you have to have a degree to get a job. And you have to have a good GPA on that degree to get a job. College is not about actually learning anything - it's a purely monetary investment, where you go into debt totaling up to hundreds of thousands of dollars because you know that it will net you more money in the future. Not cheating is completely risking any hope of financial independence you can ever have for your entire life.

Given all of this, why wouldn't you cheat? You take an extremely minimal risk (most profs don't have any clue, or do not care about cheating at all) to avoid a much greater risk (you not getting good grades and potentially never getting any return on your lifelong 6 figure deep debt).
> a lot of things I learned from ME have made it into the seemingly utterly different compilers.

Do you mind elaborating on this or providing a link if you've discussed this before?
> Why aren't college courses overloaded with freeloaders?

Because freeloaders want quick wins. A lecture is a lot of time consumed, without an immediate financial gain, where they could be collecting multiple Gatorades instead.

Ie Physical, immediate gains are greatly preferred by freeloaders. They don’t see the long game.
Hmm. If I recall correctly, Therac-25 destroyed the company. It (and incidents like it) led the FDA to gradually be more stringent on scrutinizing software in medical devices. And yet, to the best of my knowledge, even the FDA has not mandated formal verification of the embedded software in medical devices.

And yet, there almost certainly were lawsuits. So maybe you found evidence that perfectly counters my theory. It changed software, but only a little bit. Very little, given the magnitude of what happened.
It's based on advisories, so, it also includes vulnerabilities that are not given yet a cve,
I very humanizing account. I've had the blessing of having a very fast metabolism, even in my thirties I'm in the "underweight" BMI category despite eating whatever I want. I'm petrified it'll slow down at some point, and I'll get fat because I have no self control, as I've never needed it before.
Just come up with my own questions that aren't answered on google.
What domestic wells currently have non-existent transport? What pipelines has the Biden administration not approved other than the Keystone XL (which TC Energy abandoned plans for nearly a year ago)?
> This is the side effect of lazy teaching. Unique tests cannot be leaked. Problem solved.

I have never heard of lazy teachers ever getting any consequences, so why should they stop doing these things? You could make it a part of their job, but of course lazy principals wont do that either. There just aren't any incentives to run a school properly.
if cheating to get the piece-of-paper-with-your-name-on-it gets you a better job, without the actual requirement of knowledge, then the blame goes to the employers who solely use a piece of paper for credentials and not knowledge/capability tests.
The author's engineering license lapsed in 2018, in 2020 he realized it had lapsed, so he renewed it and paid a late fee.

He's being asked to pay a fine, take an ethics course, and admit to dishonesty--because during the period when the license was lapsed, he still put "professional engineer" after his name.

It sounds like this is happening because some people are mad at him, and not because this is a serious violation that a licensing board would ordinarily punish.
It’s ok, this person incorrectly assumed I’m hearing about the concept for the first time, instead of just not thinking of it first. So not only was their comment degrading, but also unfounded.

Great xkcd nonetheless!
You’d think they would have sanity checked a couple.
maybe it depends on how you are being managed...

if your constantly ticketed and measured on an hourly basis, there really isn't "time" available outside of what was allocated to you

on the other hand, if your workload is a collaboration, then you have the opportunity to negotiate "time" to fix issues that are slowing you down (compile times, test iteration, debugging, tooling) which will buy your more time (for features/improvements) later
I think people use Poetry for a variety of reasons, but I don't think speed is one of them.
We need to understand the nuclei. The only way to do that is to create macro-scale working models of nuclei, to see what happens inside them. The «walking droplet» kind of experiment is a step in the right direction. These experiments are much, much cheaper than any other experiment in quantum or nuclear physics, but nobody wants to fund them.
A couple articles I wrote years ago:

https://www.digitalmars.com/articles/b39.html

https://www.digitalmars.com/articles/b40.html

And one about its influence on compilers:

https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3386323
Well there is an "about" page, linked from the header in desktop or hidden in the "+" menu on mobile.

Their articles have shown up here a fair few times, which I assume is part of what makes it interesting.
The author has a responsibility to out the cheaters. It's unacceptably unfair to the students in his course who didn't cheat, and cheaters should be shamed publicly and have their career prospects severely damaged. I really don't give a shit what excuses or justifications someone might have had for cheating, if you had to run away from home sleep under the bridge and suck dick for wifi after your dad killed your mom or whatever. I literally do not give one flying fuck. Cheating is not acceptable or excusable, ever, period.

I'll go further and say that if you're not ready to out cheaters in your classes, you have no business teaching
Even accounting for the differing population sizes, ABC's output seems much smaller than BBC's.

As an Aus resident, I barely consume any ABC media (occasionally the ABC site, for local news I haven't found elsewhere).
They said they couldn't run certain things again, I assume they were explaining why they couldn't.
I get the idea that they often do neither until it's too late, because they don't want anybody to know how bad it is.
I completely agree with this view. However, I think it's worth trying hard to give the students the benefit of the doubt and ask how cheating might be rational. In other words, flip the assumptions and ask why we would require them to study something that they are just going to cheat at.

Now for sure it could potentially be that the students just don't have enough foresight, being younger and having less experience with life on this planet with other human beings. But again, what if we're not so quick to blame them?

The best thing I can come up with using this line of thinking is that a lot of the stuff that students are forced to study just isn't essential...i.e. it's not actually mandatory for life. Now life is very diverse and there's very little that is actually mandatory. But there are still a lot of things that are pretty important. What if the structure of our education system was more customizable, so students would have a clearer ability to choose their own adventure? Or as another commenter here alluded to, what if our system was more customizable about when you choose to get particular bits of education?
> Who knew I could automate pdf text entry from R.

Interesting, wonder if this is easier than Lumin
The dirty secret is that it’s never about the coding skills.

It’s about the person’s behavior, the way he/she interacts with you. It’s about the person’s culture, tabs vs space, and that kind of things. And it’s mostly about whether you like the person or not.

And I think it’s fine. You mainly need to be sure that the person knows what a for loop is, other than that, most people are ok at programming. What really matters is that you can work with that person.

Unfortunately interviewers who don’t realize this will unconsciously tweak the interview to make it harder for people they don’t like and easier for people they do like. And then they have an “objective” reason to not hire the person: “oh my god, he didn’t know merge sort”.

I give all kinds of random questions. And many times I recommend hiring people who bombed it, and many times I recommended bailing on ones who nailed it (overconfidence, poor communication, etc).
Set up the organisation so it is run by a truly independent board. And be eternally vigilant so any one group can't get control.
My comment was more about the parent comment's poor comparison between SF and Tokyo by using Tokyo Metropolis (Tokyo-to) population density – which includes large areas of rural land and mountains – instead of the 23 Wards which is still not perfect but a better approximation of the "city" part of Tokyo Metropolis.

I agree that the link's comparison of Tokyo 23 Wards with all of NYC is not an appropriate comparison. But not necessarily because of single-family housing as you describe. Even for Nakano Ward (with population density nearing Manhattan's), 20.8% of residential buildings are detatched single-family homes and 48.9% of residential buildings are less than 3 stories tall [0], surely a higher proportion than several NYC boroughs. Its high density is more due to having fewer areas with offices, narrower streets (compared to NYC), and barely any green space.

[0] https://www.city.tokyo-nakano.lg.jp/dept/505700/d026142_d/fi...
Meditations is an important work to me, but it's absoltely valid critique to observe it was written by someone absolutely part of an elite, from birth. That does not diminish his setbacks, and it's an exercise for the reader to gain something from it, or not. But, like any pirce of advice, the scripture is biased and it's important to be aware of that.
> We won't get a good idea of cost until someone else can do 10x reusable rockets of similar capacity

Given that the only advantage of re-usability is cost (at least at the moment) and Falcon 9 is still more expensive than Soyuz for a third party, I don't see why they would have a significant margin.

> Remember that they want to make about 10,000 of them per year, so think in terms of car-making rather than legacy satellite construction.

There's no getting away from the fact that electronics that need to work in space (and survive launch) are more complex and expensive than those on earth. The economies of scale may simply not be there.
And this is why tech companies stopped giving a shit about undergraduate degrees back in the 90s at the latest. There’s literally no signal to be had.

None of the above is meant to deny the benefits of getting into the ivy league self-dealing club.
More like RocksDb, LevelDb or Sled - which are all just just libraries instead of services with a remote API.
That wouldn't be a 'billion dollar'+ cryptocurrency though would it
Great summary. Might have to save this.
It just a vortex.
Well, in AI, the process is called "AI can never succeed". So maybe the general thing is "X can never succeed", where X is some hugely ambitious (and ambiguous) thing, like "AI" or "formal software verification" or "curing cancer".

We're probably never going to cure cancer - that is, have some treatment that conquers all cancers. Instead, we get "for this specific type of cancer, for these specific conditions, this treatment has a higher survival rate than the ones we had before". Over time, that adds up to a lot of people living out their days rather than dying early.

And maybe software verification is the same. Enough ways of verifying specific aspects of software, and bugs have fewer places to hide. It won't find all bugs, but we'll still get better software.

But "X can never succeed" isn't a very catchy phrase. Can anyone coin a better one? (Or, is there already a better one that I don't know about?)
*For a semester. The author fixed the problem during the next time the course was taught.
Firefox doesn't have memory leaks.

Use it on Mac and Linux on a daily basis, and don't close tabs for weeks at a time when I forget about them. Are you sure it isn't your tree tabs plug ins?
If you are teaching something you're probably teaching it for >10 years. If every year you create 20 multi-part questions ("We have a factory producing boxes, what's the optimal size of box for X when Y"). You can then distribute a random question to every student in a similar bin of grade distribution. If a group of people are cheating they'll likely be in the same grade bin so this makes sure each cheater doesn't see the questions everyone else does.

You repeat this process every year for 10 years and now you have 200 questions. The next professor comes in and does the same but now also has 200 questions + answer guides.

With some basic programming you could make it automatically change the numbers (to "friendly" numbers that break up into round numbers) and have an infinite pool of challenging quiz, midterm, and final questions. If everyone gets different questions they cannot cheat by sharing answers. Only by sharing approach.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=FFS
> This has been going on for decades in Asia

I’m no sinologist, but isn’t this off by at least an order of magnitude if not two? The imperial civil service exam is famous after all and the Chinese culture is millennia ancient. The incentives for cheating have been around for a very long time.
I don't think those are fully separable concepts in legacy, spaghetti code.

Regardless, I agree that if you're willing to architect your system around the need to formally verify it, the problem is somewhat tractable and getting more so every year as tools improve. Non-experts still might need the occasional "justifiable shortcut" instead of proving everything, but it's doable.
Falkon relies on Qt for QtWebEngine, not Plasma. Which has its maintenance issues of its own (look it up, it's a chore nobody really likes doing and is therefore infrequent, something you don't want for a web engine).

Falkon, on many platforms, links Qt statically, so you stil rely on them making timely releases.

It is absolutely not a browser anybody should use.

GNOME Web has next to no UI over WebKit, so the claim is easily verified.
I don’t know how to feel about coding interviews. I never had a serious coding interview in my 24 year job history between 7 companies from 1996-2020. They were all your standard “dark matter” [1] development enterprise dev jobs.

Then I did a slight pivot to get into BigTech via cloud app dev consulting - “application modernization” [2] - still with no coding interview although I still do the same type of enterprise/cloud app dev I did in the latter part of my career in the “real world” - and a shit ton of yaml.

Even in 2020, if I couldn’t have gotten a job at either Azure or AWS, I probably would have done what it takes and practiced to increase my income by an easy six figures or more.

Coding interviews are a “gravity problem”. You can not like either. But they still exist.

That being said, if I were starting out today and could break the can’t get a job <-> don’t have experience cycle by “grinding leetcode” for few months and and end up in the top 10% of income earners in the US right out of college, I would have definitely done it and I encourage my younger relatives graduating in CS to do it.

However, if you’re just hiring for your standard yet another senior CRUD developer and paying as such ($90K-$160K) - don’t expect me to do the monkey dance.

I think algorithm style coding interviews are the great equalizer. Even though I at 48 probably couldn’t pass one without some serious practice.

[1] https://www.hanselman.com/blog/dark-matter-developers-the-un...

[2] yes it’s a full time position with the same compensation structure.
>I think these unique bottom cases were playing a different game where the rules are made up and the scores don’t matter

you may be on to something with this one
"Developer with an engineering degree" is a reasonable substitute for regimes.
That sounds great and all but I honestly have doubts about this software that detects similarities… there’s only so many ways to solve the bland questions that professors lift from books; kind of ironic. I’m assuming it’s basicallly doing AST analysis and it’s no smarter than eliminating things like variables being renamed.

They are basically stating that this “software” is 100% accurate. Furthermore it’s then left to whims of some TAs?

No algorithm can detect cheating unless the number of permutations are very very large (I.e being struck by lightening). Maybe one way to offset would be to use data as the student is entering the solution but that was never the case for us; just upload the source code to their custom made Windows app.
One of the most interesting things that comes out of Academia StackExchange when students are asking about what to do about academic dishonesty violations is how quickly they go to the "Cell Block Tango" defense.

"I didn't do it, but if I done it..."
> A better metric for deciding where you should focus the most effort on code quality is not frequency of modification

Frequency of modification is an excellent predictor though:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...

and efforts to get good predictions out of attestations of quality have so far have not been able to make as good predictions as that for sure.

> Code that never needs to be touched is fine. Although the odds are that such code is either completely trivial or subtly wrong (or both).

I'm not convinced of this: I think the longer code lives, the easier it is to convince myself it's probably correct (or at least, correct from the business perspective). Can you explain how you get your odds?

> The changes you really need to worry about are to code nobody has touched for 3 years and whoever wrote it no longer works for the company. Especially if that code was written with the mindset of "nobody will ever care about this code".

I think this is predicated on whether that code needs to be changed at all: You said you think it's likely it will need to be changed, but I don't see why you think that.
It is very exciting. Sounds like other filesystems under Linux now get zfs Adaptive Replacement Cache for free.
Unfortunately, life does not have a responsibility to be fair. Although we would sure like it to be, it is not universally possible.
I did not use any guides or tutorials, it was truly from scratch with some of the cryptography concepts borrowed from bitcoin, but with a completely different auth scheme for transactions designed specifically for business application. https://github.com/Salgat/FangChain

And not everyone at companies like Google are doing the same thing. Just because you didn't know them doesn't mean there wasn't brilliant work being done there, especially with regard to their scaling and machine learning. The folks at deep mind are doing far more brilliant and innovative work than Ethereum.
Probably the most well-known case of retrofitting an old game to use rollback netcode would be the "Slippi" fork of the Dolphin gamecube emulator to allow for smooth Super Smash Bros Melee netplay.

https://slippi.gg/about

It was released during the pandemic when in-person tournaments could no longer be held, and allowed the Melee scene to flourish online, boasting even better netplay than the official Nintendo Switch smash game.
> including 28% who favor it over the will of the people
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/...

It's a likely possibility.
My most memorable exam experience as a student was an oral exam in thermodynamics or heat transfer.

They gave a randomly selected question to me and I had 30 minutes to prepare a solution (alone in back of classroom). I provide solution which took 10 minutes then 20 minutes was additional theory questions.

For each student, it took the professor 30 minutes. So for 100 students you can do it in 5 hours.

I believe the professor was John Thome.
> 1. The technological ease of which it is to cheat: it's easier to cheat on an asynchronous online exam than when you're taking it synchronously in a large classroom.

I went to school pre-2000, so the Internet existed, but was not as prevalent as it is today. What struck me most in the article is how easy it is today to cheat today. Real-time group chats, easy sharing of screenshots and quizzes, the volume of easily-copied content off the Internet, and tools available 100% of the time simply put fraternity list of historical quizzes and copied texts in the library to shame. The ease of cheating today is one less barrier that people have to cross to compromise their morals.

I think if a goal of post-secondary education is to prepare their populations for professional success, then you're right, simply punishing cheaters does not achieve that goal. But our world today is full of examples where it's easy to take the less moral or ethical road and suffer little to no consequences. Hopefully, schools will not succumb to that too much.
I know what Cardano is because I've heard of it through the Haskell community. I bet most people have not. How do you sift through the thousands of ridiculous coins out there and say to yourself, "Oh, they probably have integrity"?

This continues to be a mystery to me as it seems no one can put themselves in the common man shoes. The common man doesn't care about tech. They don't care about the integrity behind it. They care about whether it can make them money.

List 5 coins I've never heard of and I'd probably say, "ponzi scheme" without hesitation. Do I actually know if it is? No. Does it matter? No. If the majority of shitcoins come off as a ponzi scheme, then why would anyone think something like Cardano isn't?
I'm of the opposite opinion. The industry is awash in newbies with senior titles being put on software projects where they are directly responsible for safety, privacy, health care, etc. Right now when software kills people, they chock it up to a system or hardware failure. In the next decade we will hear more about software bugs killing people, outing them, bankrupting them, overturning governments, hobbling armies, and then we'll have to reckon with why regulated titles exist.
Of course you’re correct in one sense. However, science is an old word and like many others in the English language it has multiple senses. In the context I used it in, it means a systematic body of knowledge. I’m sure you’d agree mathematics meets that criterion. Other examples include ethics and aesthetics.