skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> And if you’re right, then you have a huge opportunity, because this suggests you can disrupt any vertical where the incumbent does the LeetCode thing.

Only if you view hiring as the competitive advantage of Google/Microsoft/Apple. But everyone cargo cults the hiring practices of Google/Microsoft/Apple without becoming Google/Microsoft/Apple, which shows that it's not actually some magical unique competitive advantage.

We can get into a discussion/argument about what is the competitive advantage of Google/Microsoft/Apple (which collectively own near 100% of the market for mobile OS, desktop OS, web browser, search, etc.), but that's kind of a tangent IMO.

I will say that Google/Microsoft/Apple have a competitive advantage specifically in hiring (that is, getting many of the top candidates to apply) because of their prestige (a product of the aforementioned market dominance) and vast wealth. The latter in particular allows them to offer more compensation, especially stock compensation, than other companies.

It's important to mention though that the formalized hiring practices of these companies are largely ex post facto and could only be put in place after they were already successful. It's unlikely they hired exactly in the same way during the early years. Steve Jobs was introduced to Steve Wozniack by a friend in high school! Nobody can plausibly claim that the success of the Apple II was due to "coding interviews". Larry Page and Sergey Brin met in college, where they were already working on the ideas that led to Google. Hiring doesn't just turn into success, that's not a reliable formula.

You can set the bar as high as you like, but you won't be able to hire anyone if candidates just walk away from your obstacle course. Talented people put themselves through a lot of crap to work at BigCos because there's a big payoff working for a BigCo. That's what tends to make the BigCo hiring pool better than for other companies, not the hiring bar itself. You can afford to be extremely picky if you have a wealth of options to pick from.
Relevant quote:

Mr Smith: I say your society, after which we started to do your thinking for you and it became our society
The issues here are taxes and labor laws. If you work remotely for a company abroad then taxes are now higher for you, since now you're paying the share your employer was paying for you, since you work as a freelancer (Austria does not allow direct employment for companies not headquartered in Austria), and you also loose social benefits like PTO and sick leave despite paying higher taxes.

So international remote work is kind of a loose-loose scenario here unless you get some super high compensation to make up for the disadvantages.

Also, I had a lot of negative experiences interviewing for remote only companies. Week long take home projects (basically free labor), multiple interview stages with IQ tests, culture and other hazing and then finally, either ghosting or rejection for whatever undisclosed reason. This is not a good use of my time, especially not for weeks on end, after 8 hours of actual work at my current employer. I was buying myself a one way ticket to burnout central.
As much as the OP claims they take cheating seriously and as an opportunity to engage with students and have them learn amongst other noble undertakings.

I think they just really enjoy catching people cheat and see how far it goes. Sort of masochistic tbh
I think in both cases, whether the working end should be fed from the bottom of the loop or from the top depends on whether we're crossing the working end under or above the bight the first time: working end that crosses above the bight leads to feeding into the loop from the top and vice versa.
That's for figure of eight but for figure of eight above first leads to feeding from the bottom of the loop at the final step and vice versa.
Before there's a silly comment about "shoeboxes", see the concept of "streetcar suburbs" and how things used to be built pre-WW2:

* https://www.google.com/maps/place/125+Hampton+Ave,+Toronto,+...

* https://www.google.com/maps/place/50+Geoffrey+St,+Toronto,+O...

* https://www.google.com/maps/place/70+Jackman+Ave+Toronto,+ON

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetcar_suburb

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWsGBRdK2N0&t=1m8s

High(er) density does not mean Manhattan and Hong Kong levels of density. You can have a backyard and a garage (usually adjacent to a laneway) if you want to. Just because only car-dependent suburbs have been built for the last few decades in North America does not mean that is the only type.

Further, as you can see from the above street views, plenty of folks still own cars, but they become optional instead of being mandatory / a necessity, for many things.

50-100 people per hectare (5000-10'000 people/km^2) is not crazy high (see Hamburg, Paris, Stockholm, London, Brussels):

* https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter4/environment...

A video of what's available via a fifteen minute bicycle ride from Amsterdam:

* https://twitter.com/notjustbikes/status/1528394830086275075

See also:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cO6txCZpbsQ&t=9m28s

Fifteen minutes pedalling in one direction is downtown, fifteen minutes in the other is farm land.
Probably better. A lot of sites chose to become worse, although they were already secretly/silently terrible.
If you can't find another job quitting might not be an option. Imagine if you have a family or someone that depends on you.
Actual non-clickbait article title:

CRISPR-Cas9 editing of the arginine–vasopressin V1a receptor produces paradoxical changes in social behavior [sic] in Syrian hamsters

Nome of the words "mutant", "rage" or "monsters" appears in the text
If you don't include the parser, "factorial working" is going to be the same evaluating just about any scripting language. You don't see half the value in Lisp's syntax until you're writing the parser.
I'm growing more and more frustrated with open offices, and with $management's unwillingness any concerns. Quitting isn't really an option: I haven't seen a single Belgian company that has an acceptable office layout for software engineers. Even desk sizes seem to be getting smaller and smaller. Remote options are few and far between (and I don't want to WFH anymore).
> Would sqlc.dev fit here? It is now one of my favorite database-related codegen tools.

So this scaffolds sql queries? That's pretty cool
Pretty great actually. The good it has done for end users are immeasurable at the same time as the cost for shady companies is increasing.

Going slow though, but that is hardly surprising (and the opposite would be alarming)
Ask HN: Do you use the bash alias feature much?
I tend to forget aliases I've set up and mostly use Ctrl+R to reverse search history and find the command I want if I've used it before. Either that or "history | grep <command_used_before>" if it was some time in the past. Aliases just don't stick in my memory.
There are number of ways around this.

If you are not after speed, then you can do a redundant array of cheap nodes. Instead of using raid, just shove in an 8-12tb disk in a number of thin clients.

The key is that they spend most of the time turned off.
I like the concept of async work but I’m also scared of how transactional that would make work. Most companies that preach async now have a very strong, “friendly” culture. If async catches on more widely I’m worried it would be the final push to make software development purely transactional and performance/pay would be directly tied to metrics.

I enjoy the human component of work. I don’t like _all_ of my coworkers, but it’s still a net positive to interact with them.

When I think about the ideal software job, a lot of the aspects of day-to-day work informally become async. Especially as you work with people for longer periods of time and gain mutual trust, a good workplace allows both managers and individual contributors to structure their own time.
No burstable graviton3's yet :-(
this costs as much as every PC i've ever owned put together!

my budget homelab is 100% recycled (ewaste):

- dual core pc (free)

- hard drives (free)

- ram (free)

- lcd monitor (free)

- mdadm + ext4
Interesting, but the article is written with the implicit assumption that humans can change their sex. This is false - changing one's sex is impossible. Whatever recognition these people should have, it mustn't involve officials denying the basic facts of biology.
> Type inference isn't an IDE feature related to autocompletion.

Except... it sorta is? The benefits you describe are real, but they are derived from type checking. In principle you can get the same effect while making all the types explicit. Without basic type propagation this is horrifically verbose to the point that no language I'm aware of rolls that way. Without type inference, it's usually manageable. Type inference is a (very!) nice to have feature on top of that where the compiler is kind enough to fill in the details it can figure out, which doesn't happen to live in the IDE (usually? ever?) but is basically the same idea as IDE autocompletion except that the result is not typically visibly reified (... outside of an IDE or equivalent).

What I disagree with from the grandparent is the notion that the type annotations (that inference allows us to remove) always or overwhelmingly improve readability. I think the verbosity they add - particularly when they get repetitive - means they often obscure far more than they enlighten. And when they do pay their way - which is not rare - you are still free to include the annotation!
The fact that people prepare for an interview doesn't say per se it's a failed model.
> Or any co/startup doing "deep tech" in the area of Deep Learning.

Send me a message, my email is in my profile.
In Clojure dependency injection is rare and typically explicit in some way or another. But the problem you describe does not happen as far as I understood it.

Dependency injection in that sense is only used in the "impure" parts, at the edge of your program, to build up application state.

A popular approach is using something like integrant, which describes dependencies as a plain data structure, which gets resolved as a dependency graph and calls into multimethods (polymorphic functions) that you provide to start/stop individual services or what have you.

Another popular approach is to use something like mount, which is basically just a macro which you use to describe how a service is started or stopped. All the dependency stuff is simply resolved via Clojure namespaces.

Both of these (and others) are done in a way so you can start/stop your whole app or parts of it, or just individual services in a REPL. Most of your code doesn't interact with these services, but gets called from them (functional core), so you typically don't need mocks or other such things in testing as your domain logic doesn't know anything about application state.
While it's almost too mangled to unwrap, it's not that AI has done anything (or even exists), it's that a lot of peoples theory of mind/self stops at artifacts language, where language can be redefined with the logic of some small, cost effective ideas, transmitted using media, and now gamified using platforms.

The necessary condition for news and stories is a conflict of some kind, and when you start with an idea whose logic is internally inconsistent, meaning you can apply it as evidence of anything, you can produce and represent a conflict over the most mundane bit of stimuli, and this unmoors your critical faculties from needing reality. It replaces truth with the uncertainty of conflict so as to neutralize you to it. Take a few of these broken axioms, and you have enough to write a virus over language that parasitizes minds, and makes the host minds human instruments of its agenda. It's not AI, it's much older, and the logic of an underlying idea. It's like a logical toxoplasmosis infection, where the host will sacrifice itself to spread it.

Reminds me of the most uncanny and weird TNG episode I never want to watch again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(Star_Trek%3A_The_Nex...
While I have my reservations about a permanent 4-day workweek, it's not clear to me that's the defining characteristic of Bolt that caused it to lay off 1/3 of employees. It could as easily be described as "Bolt, the SF payment services startup, lays off 1/3 of employees", and that would suggest something very different about the cause.

Now I suppose it could be that a 5th workday per week would have changed this outcome, but it could equally be that a payment services startup in an economy headed into recession, is not well positioned to grow as much as it thought when it hired the last few hundred people, thus it needed to shrink.

Again, I'm not saying a 4-day workweek is necessarily going to work out for most companies, but it seems like the business a company is in, is a more likely factor leading to layoffs.
Wearable displays can do that but they were not designed to do that. Its called „augmented“ or „virtual“ REALITY for a reason.
Focus is an issue in regard to legibility even if you dont use the 3d space. If you do you get even more issues with tracking, stabilizing, more focus issues as you generate defocus, filtering, occlusion limited fov and more.
These devices are designed for rendering believable dinosaurs into natural environments. It will take a while until they deliver on the promise.
Regarding container processes, it depends on how your containers are written. In the best case, each process is not so much an OS as a kernel instance - a kind of poor man's unikernel. It's an extremely stateless process that requires the bare minimum of the physical host.

The overhead that concerns me more is messaging. A network of N nodes has N! paths. In the general case it doesn't take long before the overhead of internal messaging absolutely dominates all other processing in the steady-state. Most people take a brute force approach of partitioning the network on purpose, or even intentionally bottle-necking (again) all the traffic. What's really hilarious is when you see people architecting microservices with kafka and apogee with all the uservice trimmings, only to deploy everything to a single physical rack, or even a single beefy machine.

I feel like the proper path to scalability goes through repeated breakage, because then you get to see how things actually break under load, and what can be done to fix it. For example, you can do a lot by moving logic to stored procs, or equivalently, moving your db into your application process. But people seem to think these are non-starters, for some reason, probably because the notion of stateless app servers as the key to horizontal scalability has become a Law, even though there are alternatives. But good luck questioning foundational assumptions - the risk is just too damn high.
I'm thinking about this for a while and I believe we are already in the 3th stage of evolution of evolution:

Evolution 1: fittest survive

Evolution 2: human brain + being able to remember gave us glasses and stuff which breaks the fittest survive

Evolution 3: the internet as a huge brain. Tons of input, tons of processing and tons of output

Evolution 4: manifesting the data in the internet into ML models. Creating a new entitiy

Evolution 5: our brain gets overtaken by ai. Perhaps robots?
Often tech debt stems from political and cultural issues that cannot be (easily) fixed. And even when that's not the issue, are obviously non-trivial costs to resolve. It's been hard for me personally to realize how cultural, even religious Silicon Valley and technology work is. I tend to think there's a common appreciation for certain values, openness and transparency in execution, and these are not the case.
Interesting proposal.

Let's say this was formalized as follows:

Each student would be encouraged to serve as mentor for up to 3 younger students, starting on year 3 of their studies, and each semester thereafter, and receive some small stipend for each mentee.

At the start of each semester, prospective mentors would be listed and students would be allowed to seek them out. Both parties would be allowed to know the grades of each other, and the mentees would be allowed to reach out to former mentees of the same mentor. Mentors would also be allowed to do some kind of self-promotion where they could "sell" their abilities as mentors.

After each exam, the mentoring would count as having taken a course for the mentor, with the grade equal to the average grade of their students, and it would provide a numbe of "mentoring credits" equal to the number of students passing. This might seem unfair, but the idea is that this would encourage competition among mentors to "catch" the best students, encouraging the mentor to put effort in.

For the next semester/course, new mentor student connections could be set up, or the same as the semester before could be kept, if both sides agreed.

When a student receives their final diploma, all the mentoring results would be listed, both courses, average grade of students, and number of students, as well as total students*courses mentored and the average grade for those.

I can imagine a lot of employers would be highly interested in this information, as it could be extremely predictive for some kinds of positions (in particular positions of leadership or teaching). Students who had repeatedly mentored other students who achieved great results would be likely to, in the future, be able to recruit and keep high quality employees and help maximize the output of a team. In both cases, it might be it would be the very students they had been mentoring that would be potential hires.

Or, if employed by a university, would be likely to attract high quality post-graduate students as well be effective supervisors for them.

Now shy, intravert or people with bad social skills might find this unfair. But I think there would still be room for people who focused exclusively on learning the subjects themselves, and these would have more time available for that. These might also care less about those jobs where mentoring success would be seen as crucial.
But "stricter rules", apart from not being absolute enough to be strict, depend on fonts (including mostly invisible metrics like ascenders and descenders vs. line height) and on what kind of text is being spaced. For example, the visually important vertical rhythm of ink and gaps is dictated by line spacing, but in relationship with x-height (for mostly lowercase text), or capital height (for uppercase text) or something in between, and between lines in adjacent fonts depends on where the respective baselines are located.
New drives are around $16-$20/TB depending on if you catch a sale and are willing to shuck. You can pick up used SAS drives in 3-4TB capacity for around $5/TB. I'm a crazy person, so I built this to hold 11 3TB SAS drives:

https://imgur.com/a/JqbBN1p

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/dLhNvf

I used a Supermicro MB and ECC RAM. It's not much more expensive and it's nice having IPMI. I personally think it's crazy to forego ECC. The SAS controller, expander, and drives were used, everything else was new. Prices have gone up. The new parts were $638 at the time. The drives were ~$20/ea. The HBA and expander were ~$85 for both. After the fans, cables, extra drive cage and brackets, total cost was around $1K. This hardware is all supported out-of-the-box by TrueNAS. I haven't done the math to figure out when the cost of running this will exceed having purchased higher capacity drives.

This is what a typical used SAS drive looks like. 30K hours hours but very few on/off cycles. Zero defect list:

https://pastebin.com/WcUYX4JR

The failed SMART test turned out to be a firmware issue. I had to update the firmware on all the drives. That was a bit of an adventure:

https://pastebin.com/j3AGX0xN

A few drives arrived with a non-zero defect list or otherwise failed burn-in. I contacted the seller on eBay and they sent me replacements w/o any fuss. I'm not necessarily recommending used SAS drives, but I'm not recommended against them either. I will recommend the serverbuilds forum for generally good advice on all this. I think this post got me started:

https://forums.serverbuilds.net/t/another-nas-killer-4-0-bui...

The current NAS killer version is 5.0:

https://forums.serverbuilds.net/c/builds/18
Is anyone running a similar scale setup with cloud storage and rclone? I’ve been considering retiring my 16TB NAS
I’d like to add, that supposed “superstar” student who read the chat to learn the other class info and left to not read the cheating… “sent no texts”.

As someone who recently graduated, this student is a freeloader. Comparable to companies who heavily use OSS but never contribute. I expect them to be a terrible coworker.
Germane: https://nautil.us/how-i-rewired-my-brain-to-become-fluent-in...
It is a big feature on macOS and I remember them announcing it. I use it sometimes, though I do wish it worked in Chromium-based browsers and supported Cyrillic alphabet.
My first impression is that a better algorithm is obtained with one vector for each hash function, but now I am lazy to do the math.
Because some people look at a job as merely a means to an end. That end being a paycheck. Their quality of work often reflects this value system.
No, there is no experimental proof of dark matter, only puzzling measurements of distant galaxies. Plenty of scientists are looking for alternative explanations, as well as trying to detect dark matter directly. They’ve got some wacky ideas, but none as wacky as your idea that only neutrons have mass.
Khan Academy for introductory physics [1] and "GRE Physics Review" for a summary of undergraduate physics [2]

[1] https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics

[2] https://www.amazon.com/GRE-Physics-Review-Comprehensive-Subj...
Indeed, the 747 is quite popular amongst cargo carriers.

In comparison, part of the A380’s short life is that it’s useless as a freighter since a minimal amount of freight would bring it to “too heavy to fly” territory.
That's all the more reason to publish and promote good instructions.
Wanting to save money also falls under availability of staffing trained to do this. Considerations of if the massive increase of expense and diversion of people from other economic endeavors is worthwhile.
How is calling out someone’s truly toxic behavior actively harming the foundation back-stabbing? If I were to found anything and later on I become a hindrance to it, I very much want to be called out for that.
This is an interesting concept, do you know of any other good “study guide” books ?
He's teaching this person how to use internet tools to look up the answers to questions.

The expression is "Give a man a fish, and you will feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you will feed him for a lifetime."

For the person on the other side, if they are familiar with the idiom, they will fill-in the rest of it, and realize that they are being taught a useful skill that will help them in their life.

Being allergic to fish myself, but one who loves fishing, this one never really worked for me, but it works for most people.
To take this further

dead internet theory - bots spamming ragebait/clickbait across social media, bots in the comments fueling more division, rage.

I think any rational person would be trying to opt out of the hyper emotional news/internet and not feed the machine, as its a little tiresome/boring to be baited so easily but that could just be bc internet natives are so used to calling out bad bait on forums