skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
With the advent of the digital video era, frame grabber as a kind of peripheral device, that captures a single frame from an analog video signal and stores it as a digital image under computer control, plays a seemingly small but crucial role in digital visual presentation.

The history of frame grabbers spans several decades and reflects the broader evolution of computer vision and digital imaging technology. I would like to show you some key milestones in the development of frame grabbers.

The full version: https://www.eyecloudai.com/forum/tech-info/do-you-know-the-h...
The unfortunate reality is that If you don't do this you'll hire people who can't program
I feel you two are talking past each other a bit.

> Stepping back: the problem you're trying to solve is literally impossible to solve at compile time.

This is not being solved at compile time. OsString/OsStr (and PathBuf/Path) are basically there for ergonomics _and_ safety. They're not just used for filesystem paths either, but for other things too.

All the checks happen at runtime time (but only the checks relevant for the target platform, since it's different implementations per platform) when converting between String and OsString.

For path manipulation and filename encoding quirks (I don't know much about those) I think some of it is done in-memory, but a lot of it happens when you access the disk, that's true.

However you can still isolate those checks early and pass file references, or do a preflight check.

You can do this in others languages too, but Rust surfaces the potential issues nicely with Result in combination with other type system features, and makes the handling of those cases more ergonomic than most things I've worked with
Since there is so much anxiety about mac-only -- could you provide a small python file to read out the raw photos on any platform ?

It looks like you could just 'dd if=/dev/disk123 of=/tmp/bigrawfiles' and then postprocess with said python script.

Yes, not as good as a polished apple app, but for many people that really like the hardware and don't mind a bit of DIY, it's maybe enough...
Miner targeted in suspected cyber attack after removal of Chinese investors
For a small network; a router, a single server hosting stuff, an AP, and whatever wireless clients: Low On Actual Network.
Finally combining the power of AI analysis and chatbot functions to budget and plan for your future! Get your own AI CFO to advise you on spending, investing, and planning for your financially free future. 30-day trials available at james@wefire.io. Thanks!
It's a library written by some devs who thought it might be useful to others, too, and/or are proud enough to share their work. It's not that they'll publish it in an SEC filing.

For every n-th solution in the market, n-1 existing ones could have been used, but they weren't for (many times) good reasons.

And looking at their Makefile and pyproject.toml I can see that they knew what they wanted.
Is it possible to limit the CA to only cover certain domain, e.g. *.yourown.home.arpa? Or is it the case that if you install a CA of your friend, it grants them the possibility of MitMing most any service (with non-pinned cert), at least when enabled by network topology?

I've been using a local CA for a long time, but I have not found a way to limit it that way, so security-wise it is less than optimal.
Google can't take back the source but they can make distribution of binaries hard? Most Windows users are very dependent on pre-built binaries, for example.

And doesn't Google have leverage over Mozilla by way of their funding?
the eyes have it
it sucks, but honestly having a very clear metric for success is significantly better than the wishy-washy interviews that predated this. i'd much rather grind and be prepared to just regurgitate some algo/code and explain it than deal with the color of the sky being wrong, interviewer woke up on wrong side of bed, i was coerced into doing a "project" that equated to just unpaid work, etc.

whether or not you succeed as an engineer generally falls down to whether or not you know how to code (pretty much anyone is good enough at this for most jobs), can you communicate effectively (covered during the behavioral portions of interviews), and do you work hard.

honestly i think it sucks, but in comparison we're pretty lucky. i think a lot of people in this world would be happy to grind a few hours a day for a couple of months to get paid 250k+ base
I get the feeling this was less a conscious decision and more an admission of defeat.
> The real problem of Japanese is the massive amount of homophones coming from Chinese

So you're saying that verbal communication doesn't work in Japan and everyone just texts each other? "I'm sorry Mr Honda Kawasaki but due to how Japanese language works it's impossible for me to tell whether you want to buy three oranges or cook prostate cancer, please send me a letter" "Okay I will fight the sky colander"

Most countries at some point had to simplify their languages in order to promote literacy. Korea didn't ditch hanja just for shits and giggles, it did so in order to make it easier for schools. Japan never really had to face this problem at a scale that required complete removal of kanji because by the time people got such ideas Japan was already quite literate, so kanji stuck around. Plus, Japan is an extremely conservative society, they only ever change anything once all other options have been exhausted.

Same reason why English spelling is so ridiculous. It's not that English is such a unique language that it absolutely requires a spelling system that doesn't make sense and effectively forces everyone to memorize each word's spelling aside from it's pronounciation (wow just like kanji), it's just that English spelling has never been a problem to a degree that required a systematic solution, so now we're stuck with what we have. If we suddenly decided to make a giant reform of English spelling to have it reflect actual pronounciation, the resistance would be equally giant.
Regarding comments saying that parent comment lacks good faith, and code is free so take it as is, should also consider that parent has all the rights to express his concerns and opinions. If you don't like criticism or inconvenient questions, just skip it or ignore. For example parent insights were interesting to me. Good questions that i can learn from how critically evaluate things.
Leetcode interviews are in general just incredibly poor signal-to-ratio; especially with the advent of LLMs making it easier than ever to just cheat on the problem. I would just generally assume that any company with that as an initial barrier isn't actually looking to hire anyone at all, but for the sake of 'appearing' to have employee growth.
Google paid out a bounty for the internal Search API leak
I'm almost as sick of reading about them.

> I don’t really have a solution to this problem, I just know it’s a problem.

Yeah, exactly. You don't have a better answer and nobody else does either.
I lead tech interviews for E5/6 level engs where I work.

Everyone knows how pointless it is. But it’s become more like paying the tax.

For the record, I typically give away the a-ha moment early on and see how the candidate is able to take the suggestion and work through a problem with me.
Listen again. He describes both — single big ship the first year and many small chips the next.
"Solar energy is the most abundant energy resource on earth -- 173,000 terawatts of solar energy strikes the Earth continuously. That's more than 10,000 times the world's total energy use."
source: https://www.energy.gov/articles/top-6-things-you-didnt-know-...

I'd say we don't run out of renewable energy in the near future, we just have to collect more of it.
> I don’t really have a solution to this problem, I just know it’s a problem.

The solution is simple: refuse to do those interviews. I have, and I wish more engineers would. It's one of my screening questions: do you do whiteboard style quiz/brainteaser interviews? If the answer is affirmative, I politely (and sometimes impolitely) decline.

I've written a book, edited another, contributed to plenty of open source, including Golang, started a few companies, and been around the block. I'm more than happy with a take-home or with going over code I've previously written, but doing leetcode in a "live coding session"? I'm good, thanks.

For FAANG and other huge companies, it's probably a decent heuristic (though I doubt even that), but smaller startups or non-tech companies doing this nonsense is a clear red flag. I mean, there's entire books dedicated to gaming the software engineering interview. The signal-to-noise ratio is probably so terrible, it's essentially just professional hazing at this point.
I see these posts a lot, and I sort of disagree with where they are coming from so I'll play devils advocate. Leetcode is used to select for one of (or both of these) 2 things for the average IC hire:

1. Do you work hard (i.e a person who studies many problems, memorizes solutions, and regurgitates then)

2. Are you smart (i.e a person who doesn't do any leetcode but knows the fundamentals and can sythesize past knowledge well enough to answer a new question)

Now in a vaccuum, my takeaway from someone who doesn't pass a leetcode question is that they are more likely to not be either of those (given no other information about them). In my opinion, solving at least one leetcode easy - medium question (maybe with some direction from the interviewer) should be the standard for any role where you need to code.

And realistically, companies index less on leetcode skill as you become more senior or apply to more niche roles. And plenty of companies out there have bug squash rounds, system design, behaviorals, take homes, trivia, background specific questions, etc. Leetcode is usually not the be all end all for hires above entry level. Leetcode is not meant to magically select for the best engineers. Its simply another signal for the hiring committee to use.
Tribunal penises to rise as UK firms push back on their foreskins, experts say
And I am so sick of „I am so sick of leetcode-style interviews“-style posts. Yet here we are. How much more can this dead horse be beaten? Aren’t you tired of discussing this topic with the same arguments each time?
Can you memorize “War and Peace” in one sitting and randomly and precisely recall things from it on demand? No? Didn’t think you could. Could you perhaps translate Farsi into Hawaiian and then speak it? Can you give instant, and nearly always correct to almost any textbook question irrespective of the domain? All of that is recall, and all of that GPT4 could do for well over a year.
The last few interviews I've run, I've shown the candidate sample code and asked them to review it. We have samples that have at least one bug / problem per line. Then some modeling task (whiteboard). We have some simple exercises (fizzbuzz style) to figure out if juniors actually can junior and as a springboard into discussing topics like runtime complexity, memory layout and stuff. This is all highly interactive, depending on how well the candidate does. The idea is to figure out if the candidate somehow faked themselves through screening as well as to somehow get a feeling for cultural fit...
I wonder if its just to see how someone handles stress.
Van Plato's book seems interesting! I see that it has a chapter on natural deduction and sequent calculus. I found the focus on introduction and elimination rules in natural deduction always somewhat mystifying, and wondered about what exactly natural deduction is. As I discovered just in the last few weeks, even if, like me, you don't know anything about the proof theoretic foundations of natural deduction and sequent calculus, they pop up naturally as proof systems for abstraction logic (AL): natural deduction is the proof system if your truth values form a complete lattice, and sequent calculus is the proof system if your truth values form even a complete bi-Heyting algebra. Note that in AL, there are no a-priori constants (such as ∧ or ⇒), so there are also no a-priori rules for elimination and introduction, but just the essence of natural deduction and sequent calculus.

See http://abstractionlogic.com for the least klunky presentation of AL to date.
That... didn't come out of nowhere.

The capability of priests of the Lord of Light was established as was the stage for Melisandre to grasp on to the Jon after the defeat of Stannis.
I run a kind of similar service to Yotta (though we haven't launched to consumers yet, and don't have the gimmick of investing some portion of your interest into a lotto-style system).

Coffeezilla (linked in another comment) did a good job explaining it.

Yotta isn't a bank and doesn't hold user funds -- those funds are at a bank (almost definitely, unless they're breaking the law which I have no reason to suspect), and the bank pays FDIC insurance on each of them. This means the funds are safe against a variety of threats, but not all. Being at a bank is also not the same thing as being available (though banks do have availability reporting and capability requirements).

From what I recall Yotta contracts with Synapse for integrating into a bank, and the issue is between Synapse and the bank they work with.

Depending on who maintains the authoritative copy of the ledger (the bank or Synapse), the bank may only know the total amount in all combined user accounts and periodically audits of individual accounts -- so they could have ended up in a situation where $X in the bank for Y users, but the total on the Synapse's ledger for that same set of Y users exceeds $X, something which is never supposed to happen unless you're a (highly regulated) bank.

If that happened there would probably need to be a much more detailed and time consuming audit of every transaction to determine the "real" balance of each account, and figure out why it doesn't match the total the bank has.

Depending on how Synapse implemented their ledger (and this is continuing to assume they are the system of record), that may involve restoring backs and trying to piece together everything from data that was not necessarily intended for this purpose.

Because, in this scenario, the bank doesn't know who owns which dollars it has in Synapse's account it can't give those dollars back to their depositors.

If worse comes to worse, the bank will sort it out by asking depositors for proof of deposits and then try to correlate those to Synapse's best guess at data that matches total deposits.

If Synapse did something with user funds (not the data on their ledger, the actual dollars) other than what the user directed, then there could be big trouble for them and I'm not sure if the FDIC coverage helps there, or if it will be a civil process to try to make everyone whole, or something else entirely.

Based purely on the reporting I've overheard and no direct insight (or even researching it beyond the reddit post and this thread), that's my best guess as to what is happening.
I'm sure anyone determined to do so can act unfairly regardless of what process is in place, but the fact that there is a standardized test in my mind does the opposite and makes the process much fairer. Assuming a fair-minded interviewer, the process gives a chance to a candidate whose resume may have less vaunted names on it to demonstrate their skill. I'm quite sure that I'd never have had some of the opportunities I have, not having a CS degree, if it weren't for whiteboarding interviews. I can't imagine any possible process that would thwart interviewers intentionally subverting it to hire their friends.
"Leetcode questions are the worst form of interview questions, except for all the others" - Churchill

I too used to hate leetcode questions, but after conducting 100s of interviews as an interviewer, leetcode style questions are the best way to test intelligence and coding skills ive found in general.

However, leetcoding interviews must be paired with system design and topgrading in order to have balanced interviews. Leetcoding alone is incomplete but i find it essential.
yeah i agree that "if you know how to problem solve you will pass" statement is a joke. you absolutely need to memorize most of these problems as you'll never encounter them out in the real world. i think we need to get better at the behavioral side of interviewing - this should be the juice of getting at whether or not an engineer is good. and if they're really good at lying... CEO material? lol.
wait, can Lisa Khan at the FTC attack this too?
I am still not sick for this. (╥‸╥)
Location: American in China

Remote: Yes, willing to travel throughout China for onsite visits

Willing to relocate: no

Technologies: PHP, Javascript, MySQL, HTML, React

Resume: https://www.linkedin.com/in/p-aaron-mitchell-bb23b3253/

I'm a STEM teacher with a B.S. in Chem Engineering and several websites and apps online. Looking for more challenging, technical work; willing to learn your tools.
Why do you think the poster is connected with the repo? I couldn’t see any link.
> The powerful people don't want it to exist.

Good on those powerful people then, because this data should not exist.
It's true that nobody is expected to balance a binary tree as part of the job but the point of these questions is to see how you approach the problem and how you communicate your solution. Given that you can't perfectly predict how someone will do at the job, employers use leetcode problems as a proxy. Even those who memorize leetcode solutions must also memorize how it works and understand the solution. Given that the problem is random and you're likely given multiple interviews, it's unlikely you've memorized the exact problem and solution without cheating. If you've memorized enough solutions that it's likely you've seen the problem before and you can understand the solution enough to present it, then you're in the 0.1% and deserve to pass.
Virologists and epidemiologists, as opposed to a molecular biologist with no particular specialized training in either of those topics.

Well, that was easy.
If we don't get to AGI first, the bad guys will.
JA4+ Database
I understand the frustration, but at the end of the day I think they do serve a purpose. They're not great at that purpose, but they're good enough and they generally produce false negatives (smart people fail) rather than false positives (you hire an idiot). And this makes sense, because a false negative is low cost (maybe you spend 50% longer interviewing candidates) but a false positive is high cost (you hire an idiot and have to spend months establishing that, firing them and starting the hiring process again).

The side effect of this though, is that it's an extremely painful process for the applicant. Even if you're a great software engineer, you're going to freeze up, miss something, have a bad day, and fail a few interviews. Now for most software engineers failure is an unusual and harrowing experience, so they react really badly to it. Especially ina
scenario where it's difficult to blame anyone but yourself. But just don't! It's fine! just move on, there's plenty of jobs and the interview process is a blunt tool, not a final evaluation of your worth in life.
Iceland is one example. They have a coast guard but no standing military. On the other hand, their independence is formally guaranteed by the US (and maybe others, I don't remember), so nobody's gonna be trying to annex them any time soon. On the other hand, Iceland's only been "independent" since slipping out from Denmark ~WW2.
so you’re an apologist for leetcode because of an uninspired false dilemma of another flawed interview style
And next week we'll read on HN an article explaining how take homes are unfair, racist and biased, same for "private projects".

We've been going in circles for 20 years.
This link doesn't work for me
I completely agree. The stories of the Elves awakening and living of the stars, the first rising of the sun and moon, and the world made round are so evocative it would have been a real shame to lose them in the name of realism.
I don't. Regardless who posted it, discussion and constructive criticism is warranted in the comments.
You think it is a certainty that if I care about privacy I will be put on a list (never mind what list or why does it matter), and you think it's a certainty you should appease the powers that be by pretending not to care?
> the point of these questions is to see how you approach the problem and how you communicate your solution

I disagree. It’s supposed to be that, but the reality of the interview is that there isn’t any time to problem solve so you need to learn the problems and just regurgitate the solution.

That doesn’t put you in the top 0.1%, it ensures you’ve spent dozens of hours practicing questions.
There's a difference between asking someone to invert a binary tree, and asking someone to sum up a list of numbers. The latter finds the people who can't code much more quickly!
It's notable that Chromium is an especially large repo, and it seems has been special cased in githubs repo size limits.

It's possible this is GitHub just enforcing their size limit
Oh wow, that's such a great idea! We never tried telling people to get their priorities straight, but now that you mention it, it seems like such an obvious way to sustained weight loss! You're a genius!
No, and they already said it will be used against copyright infringement as well. The child abuse angle was a lie.

Officials supportive here are either naive, extensively lobbied or have an authoritarian streak. Nothing really redeeming about their plans.
I think my favorite insult of the latter variety is from As You Like It: "I do desire we may be better strangers."
From what I understand, it didn't look like that when most users signed up -- it looked like a gimmicky bank account with a savings account that a portion of the interest was invested in a lotto-style system, so you were earning slightly less interest plus some chance to win a large payout. This is a lot different than what they "pivoted" to after accepting user deposits.
The market is so bad, and most interview sucks one way or another. The main reason is interviewer have tens or hundreds application for same position.

I have just went through one interview that have 4 rounds.

1. half hour talk
2. 2 hours coding for several crud api.
3. system design project ( I spend 2 days on it. they told I have about a week on it)
4. another half hours with CTO.

and then got rejected. (The interviewers does not bother to send a reject letter. I asked them they told me the position is closed).
The subtle yet powerful force of reciprocity in the context of social interaction is no joke and people have made a lot of money writing books on it, it’s why successful sales companies teach their sales people to use it on prospective customers, it’s why big corporations pay money to “support” politicians etc…

I’m willing to bet that your brain has spent so much time in “auto-pilot” that there are countless times where you would have reciprocated with no conscious awareness of the fact that you even did. And the fact that you think you can’t be fooled is exactly what makes you vulnerable.

And with that said, I’ll leave you with this quote:
“Click, run” - Robert Cialdini.
I blame lacking implementation of https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5280#section-4.2.1.10 by TLS clients.
> You think teachers shouldn't have growth mindset for students? I think students can grow from producing garbage answers to good answers, that is what they are there for.

I think many students including freshman have interesting and sometimes thought provoking ideas. And they come up with creative solutions, which is based on their previous experience in life. I would never describe that as garbage.