skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, yes and no. The point of "networking" is to develop a web of connections within one's industry (or within the business world in general). Build a strong enough network, the theory goes, and you'll never have to go in cold. You may not know someone at every company out there, but if you've got a strong network, you'll get a referral from someone you know who knows someone there.

The worst time to be networking is when you're looking for a new job. (That's not to say you shouldn't do it; it's just a bad time to be starting the process.) The best time to network is when you're not looking. When you've got no hidden, job-seeking agenda in mind, you're psychologically in a less desperate and more genuinely curious place. And the people you talk to will be less skeptical or cynical, because they'll see that you're not just using them to get a job. The "networking" becomes less transactional and more social, and the connections developed are more likely to be mutually interesting and beneficial.

That's not to say that reaching out to someone within a company is a bad thing, even when applying for a job. Indeed, it's better to have anyone on the inside than to drop a resume completely blind. And it's better to get the inside scoop on a company that's made you an offer than to accept the offer without diligence. Ideally, though, you don't want your first contact with someone inside the company to be simultaneous to your application to work there.

Much more can be said about "networking" -- how to do it, when to do it, ethical considerations about it, social qualms about it, or even whether "networking" is really a less ideal form of some other, presumably more meaningful activity (e.g., making friends on an agenda-free basis). But I'll leave those considerations for a different discussion.
Well, yes. Growing up surrounded by messages to constantly BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY BUY ON IMPULSE BUY RIGHT NOW kinda erodes self control.

If the phone-stacking trick works, then it's a useful hack to retrain ourselves - at least for a moment - out of this constant impulsive consumerist haze.
If you insult my text editor,
I will punch you in the face.

It's very akin to:

If you touch my Charizard,
I will punch you in the face.

Or:

If you delete my FF7 slot from that card,
I will punch you in the face.

Or even:

If you talk to me about D&D4.0,
I will punch you in the face.

And quite possibly:

If you suggest Nickelback to me,
I will punch you in the face.

Or absolutely:

If you play that opening again,
I will punch you in the face.

And surely:

My surfing Pikachu!!! Noooo!
I'm going to punch you in the face!

And arguably:

If you prove that theorem like that again,
I'm going to fail you from this class.

Questionably:

If you mention "God" in this (philosophy) class again,
I'm going to throw a book at you.

These are the marks of a geek. "Geek" is not some description that someone falls under by virtue of prestige or credibility. A geek is so every day, and that person defines him or her self in terms of those things he or she is willing to punch you in the face over, should you transgress the sacred nature of those artifacts or things involved in their geekdom. There are invisible lines drawn throughout our subcultures, and geeks defend them, like trolls.

Geeks are most often trolls, the otakus, the DMs, the ones who not only play this game, but in very many real senses suffer the mental and social disparity of living it. They really listened to that obscure noise-jazz album continuously for weeks on end. They really played that RPG for 37 hours straight. They really read all the manuals back to back over the weekend.

You passed your classes with excellent marks. Bravo, well done. To each her own, but that does not make you a geek because you passed social expectations.

By-passing social expectations is what geeks do; and it is coincidence that others praise them for it and hate them for it all the same. And that doesn't matter. I use vim, and that's the only thing I'll punch you in the face over.
>That small probability is largely because of vaccination.

That's true. But I suspect that better sanitation and nutrition played a large part as well.

>so your analysis is correct for the individual, while still badly wrong for society as a whole.

I know. Which is why it is important to have safe and effective vaccines.
Thanks. For some of these companies, I don't know anyone. Would you just cold-email someone, even if you didn't have any acquaintances there?
I agree that it'd be stupid for these sites to conspire with scammers, and I doubt that's what's going on... but to dismiss it because they're already making "plenty of money" definitely doesn't fly.

We've all seen people and corporations do things that are plainly stupid in the name of more profit when they're already raking it in. Never underestimate the power of greed.
Do note that Zed actually discusses in this book (at least in the online version) why it might not be the best idea to learn C from K&R today. His basic argument, IIRC, is that the examples in K&R are very bad when it comes to writing modern C. Sure, you'll learn the language in a formal sense, but K&R is hardly going to prepare you for the reality of C programming.
A website to promote The Reform Act to reform the Parliament of Canada
>Btw, smoking is not the only way of consuming marijuana. There are also water pipes and green dragon.

And these differ from smoking how?
Do you mean you'd answer the question with a DOM parser that wasn't reliable and bug-free, that you wouldn't use a DOM parser at all, or that you'd use a DOM parser from a library (but consider such a library more acceptable than Calais which is understandable)?

Seems to me you're going to have to get a handle on the page to figure out which entities are going to be treated as such and which are e.g. nested inside comments, or within javascript strings, or within inline CSS, or in the head, or after the body close tag, or resemble entities but aren't valid ones, and so on.
You shouldn't need haproxy in the loop at all.

If your redis client is Sentinel-aware, you ask your client directly "give me the redis master server" and it asks Sentinel which server is master. The only ip address involved for your configuration is the address of the sentinel(s).

haproxy will take 30 seconds to detect your failure. Sentiel will notify you immediately. Sentinel is the one determining the exact state of the master election, and it'll be very chatty when a new master replaces the old one.
Does it change for you once we remove all visible or audible indications of others' distraction?

Perhaps we should just start to expect that we never have anyone's full attention. Indeed we never did.
Yep, it is not disrespectful in any way to call someone's point stupid and use your own incorrect projections as a way of doing so. Maybe the next time you think "I'm going to make a helpful comment on the internet" just go sit in the corner and don't bother the people who are actually having a useful adult discussion that involves facts versus baseless, passive aggressive projected insults. I genuinely feel like you would have contributed more to society by just sleeping in today...
I completely agree.

But it's still possible to respond neutrally, truthfully, and informatively.

For example, it's possible to just answer with positive aspects and leave out the negatives--that's still valuable info.

Or someone can honestly talk about whether the culture is, for example, high-energy or more laid-back -- each has its advantages.

Are you saying that it is _not_ at all worth cold-emailing a peer in a potential workplace?
Difference Between iOS and Android -- beyond numbers
I've been using gulp instead of grunt on a few projects. Gulp is literally analogous to using pipes and redirection on the command line but you do it using javascript. If you need more than that you might need grunt or some other build tool. But this simplicity makes the build process much more straight forward and easier to explain to others.
I also do electronics for a living and dabble in robotics at the local hackerspace. Would love to work on an open-source project like this. Let me now if you get something going. Max at mmmaaa.xxx
In my experience, the #1 problem by miles is that estimates are made far too early in the process, before enough detail is available to make an accurate judgment.

And then those crappy estimates are never revisited once more information becomes available.
Not to mention that iOS compatibility would make a HUGE legal target for Apple
I agree with you but "if you're browsing Twitter/Facebook/whatever while I'm trying to have a conversation with you, I'd naturally be annoyed as I think anyone would" just isn't relevant to the situation at hand. One of my main problems with the article is that the author projects the "this person must just be browsing twitter/fb and getting ZERO VALUE FROM ANYTHING THEY ARE DOING AND MUST BE UNHAPPY". Why does the possibility of this even enter the authors mind, let alone turn into a certainty?
Indeed. It's almost as if the ECMA should just freeze all JavaScript development, and replace it with a standard, low level, high performance compiler target that all browsers can implement instead, and then just let the industry/community write competing compiled languages for it. That's essentially where browsers are heading anyway with asm.js and NACL.

For everyone who still loves JS and prefers it over Coffee/Type/Clojure/etc-scripts, just make a JS compiler and keep all its quirks and wtfs.
The code probably could be made faster by avoiding passing tuples (start, length) around as these are allocated on the heap. However, I found it a little bit more abstract.
I just deleted a sarcastic comment on here making light of the situation- I had judged it from this PR: https://github.com/joyent/libuv/commit/804d40ee14dc0f82c482d...

From that commit it looks like someone simply didn't follow commit protocol and had the commit reverted because of that.

But if we look at the original https://github.com/joyent/libuv/pull/1015#issuecomment-29538..., we see that that it already had been rejected once, which is, IMO, wrong. After seeing that, it looks like it was right for someone to merge it against protocol.
When I go out to eat with my Mom we usually have books/ereaders with us, and if we don't have anything to talk about, we read. We enjoy eachothers company without talking. There has been a few times when one of my sisters would join us and would offended when she took the impression that we didn't want to talk to her since we were reading rather than talking.

There is a difference of enjoying each other's company while being quiet and being rude while ignoring someone else. I wish some very talkative person wanting me to entertain them on the bus could have been entertained by their phone. I've often used books/ereaders/phone to keep others from talking to me (and enjoying reading of course). I think one major thing to discuss is not how much we're being distracted by technology, but more of how much priority we put on socializing face to face.
I would be a basket case if I hadn't had received tons of professional help regarding problems similar to the ones you describe. So this isn't by a long shot something I'm unfamilliar with. Taking nothing but what you've written here, it sounds like you might be bipolar among other things. This is treatable. Unless you've been putting in a serious effort at therapy and trying out different medications for 5+ years (usually things will resolve way before this, I'm just referring to people I have met in therapy), there is really no reason to just lie down and die.

Please take yourself seriously and establish a professional relationship to someone to resolve these things. It doesn't have to be like this.
You commit the same fallacy... his current state of intellect has no bearing on whether smoking marijuana causes a decrease in mental functioning.

Aside from smoking, vaporizing and eating edibles are popular and safe ways to ingest marijuana.
Dragon city
I wouldn't, for the most part. Not saying that it would or wouldn't work out, but I don't feel comfortable with doing that. Going through friends who might know someone there could help, as that way you wouldn't be a complete stranger. The only instances where I might do so is if I know someone there with which we share the same background (e.g. same college) which provides some sort of common ground.

I've only ever cold e-mailed recruiters (or some job listing e-mail), which is pretty much expected.
Milky Way Galaxy’s Oldest Brown Dwarfs Discovered
I'm sorry, but I don't buy that being honest (showing up when you said you'd be there, and showing up period, and in general being a trustworthy individual) makes you a slave. I'm sure there's plenty of habitual smokers who are great dependable employees who would be insulted at this idea.
I would balk at anything that, whether or not a patient could prove causality would cost me thousands of dollars in legal bills and tie up hours of my time I could better be doing other things.

I don't think any professional can be blamed for not wanting to tie liability to client whimsey.
The story you've laid out isn't the problem. The problem is when you are at lunch with someone and instead of conversing with you they are on their phone (in your example this is justifiable but I'm guessing most people aren't getting important updates - they're texting, or checking Twitter). It's rude (I don't think anyone can deny that). The person at the next table shouldn't give a shit - it's nothing to do with him. But I can be pissed off. In this example I care about what someone else is doing because it is directly negatively effecting me. I'm at lunch with them to talk and eat with them and they are ignoring me. It would be the same if you went out to lunch with someone 20 years ago and instead of talking to you they took out a notebook and started writing, or they simply stared out the window and completely ignored you.
Publishing an app for fun, experience, and no profit
Visual perception of luminance decays exponentially, according to the strongest distinction.
I live not too far from there and my thoughts are with you guys!

Stay strong!
You're not diagnosing a patient for vaccines, that's really the point of them being given out to everyone - it's efficient, and at the cost of side-effects for those who might be more sensitive to them (whatever that means, and however that displays itself as).
Uh, it is easy to make an entity extraction program that will get you a passing grade for a CS course.

It's not easy to make one that is good enough for commercial use unless somebody is hand curating the results. For the record, OpenCalais isn't good enough for commercial use (I've tried), and like most text analysis vendors, the people there blame their customers for the lack of adoption, not their product.

If you look at the leading entity extraction products they tend to be by huge companies like BBN and IBM; the state of the art open source product is UIMA, which out of the box does precisely nothing. What it does do is make it possible to coordinate the work of 100+ developers, linguists, scientists and other people in a bunch of different timezones so you can run a sweat shop that piles up a pyramid of heuristics at a price that can only be afforded by large organizations that expect to pay a lot and get very little for it.

Now the question of how you can cheaply build a knowledge base that can do the same is an interesting one that I've thought about a lot.

You can answer 90% of the questions that show up in a data science interview with "look it up in a hash table" or "look it up the literature". Off the top of my head I'd have a hard time explaining how to make a bloom filter or how to turn text into a suffix tree, although I probably could derive an algorithm to train an HMM. I can look up all this stuff in the literature so why bother?
Or be replaced by robots. All I could think of reading that is why they haven't figured out how to fold and tape a cardboard box with a robot yet.

They should get on that, and then those people won't have to be subjected to those conditions anymore.
The more usual issue is businesses getting their machines used for banking hacked and the hacker sniffing all their credentials and emptying their accounts. Many banks don't support two-factor authentication for business accounts because they don't have to - it's not their money on the line.
No. But I do see life as a race up whatever mountain(s) you choose to summit. Capitalism baby!
You can do this, but you'd be much better off finding a common connection, perhaps through LinkedIn. No company is perfect, but someone who knows you only through a cold email would be a fool to trust you with criticism of his employer.

I'm not sure why you think that your personal site proves that you're "worth responding to." The problem with your post is that it's all about you - you're not thinking of what's in it for the recipient of your email, or what risks it poses for them.
As far as I know, the exchange never released those funds.
If you open up settings -> applications and find NFL mobile, you should be able to disable it.
I would try something slightly different. Use a 'Trojan Horse' topic or subject. Email saying you are trying to use the company's product or service in a current project.

Ask them questions about the product or service. If they are enthusiastic and helpful, that will be an indicator that the company is a good place to work. If they don't respond, or forward you to marketing or sales, that tells you something else about the company.

After the initial contact, you might then ask questions about the company in general. Something like: we like the product, but are unsure if the company will be around in a year, etc. At that point the developer might just give you the standard company line, or might be more forth coming.
And then those people won't have jobs anymore.
"neutrally, truthfully, and informatively" is very subjective.
I don't believe it will give you any insights.
The only thing that can give you some sort of vague idea of the workplace is check the Linkedin profiles of ex-employees, how long they stayed there (doesn't work for new startups...) ?
Even better if they are part of some sort of meetup, you can casually meet them and chat, but that's borderline stalking :)
TL;DR just buy a faster internet connection.

It is possible to do per-packet load sharing in Linux as the link above suggests. Both links need to be able to source traffic using the same IP address, i.e. you can't mix comcast and dsl. The way to get around this is to have an upstream router that will source your traffic from the same IP address:

client - routerD --upstream1---routerU -- the internets
|-------upstream2-----|

The iptables statistic module with random mode seems to work better than nth packet.

Keep in mind PPS load sharing is not the most effective way to utilize links as retransmissions will slow things down. Now if you have two links to the same provider it's probably OK. You can even buy a bonded connection from most providers where they do all of this for you.

You are much better off doing flow based ECMP routing:
http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/net/0207.2/0047.html

ECMP is only useful if you have a large number of clients. So you can do PPS load sharing, knowing full well that it's going to be slower than a single link some percentage of the time or just buy a faster connection.

TL;DR again, just buy a faster connection.
Regarding number 2: Loop-invariant strlen():

I would write the loop as the optimised version first hand, especially if there were nested loops.

No. 5 caught me out, but I'm not surprised.
When I applied, I used Glassdoor/Facebook/LinkedIn to search through my current social/professional network and to find people one layer removed from me who worked at my now current company. I then asked my contacts how well they knew the employees at my current company. One was able to put me in touch via email. I contacted the employee via email, said I need 15 minutes to chat with him and that it needed to be fast because I was going in for an interview that afternoon. He never got back to me but wound up being one of my interviewers. Obviously, I got the job.

Short version, showing interest helps. Showing you are connected helps.
Stealth camera takes pictures virtually in the dark
Hell, the moment a baby passes through the vaginal canal they're probably exposed to more antigens than the entire vaccine schedule, let alone their first few hours in a hospital.
What's your point? Are you suggesting that an interviewer expects you to write a production quality DOM parser in the course of a one-hour interview on a blackboard? No, they don't. So, move on: citing a library is an inadequate answer. You need to write code.
DRTBOX and the DRT surveillance systems
TuringType
I think it may be more accurate to say perceptual description of luminance may be exponential (that humans report the difference from 1 to 1/2 as being the same as 1/2 to 1/4). But I think this is all irrelevant if you are trying to reproduce tones correctly (other than it says the error-model is relative error on tones). So I would say it takes a very labored reading to think of the article statement as correct (as light falls of 1/R^2 not exponentially). But that also makes the article's point: if you are painting what is there you are more immune to wrong assumptions.
Offer to take them out to lunch. Keep the email short. Five sentences or less.

That usually works.
> Secondly, all other languages do it worse than Perl 5.

[citation needed]

Jokes aside :) if you look at the 2011 OSCon presentation pdf, you'll see it's vastly outdated (and imho the default internal encoding table is just imprecise)

OTOH I don't use unicode regexps very often, so my POV is biased (I'm sure that on this front perl5 can actually be better than virtually everything else)
I stopped reading at the second popup.
You should remove that...
That risk is similar to what Xamarin faced, and evidently they were fund-able.
I am very interested.
Yeah .."feed us with useless information" alright..like this guy's own article...
I wonder how the author's going to feel when the Oculus Rift becomes mainstream. We will be getting lost "inside" technology. Is that necessarily a bad thing?
Unemployed, but more importantly, unexploited.
My go to is something along the lines of:

You disapprove of mandatory cavity searches before air travel or entering a school? Sounds you are a drug dealer.
OP here, that's a great idea :D
So, no one ever dares to ask this, but I'm going to because I never see mention of it crop up in these sorts of discussions.

Where do you draw the line between an individual's assertion of privacy over confidential information, and contrast it with the premise of intellectual property and the use of encryption to achieve goals traditionally perceived as less noble, such as DRM?

Where does the distinction emerge, that my social security number and HIV status deserve protection, but an episode of Game of Thrones does not?

I'm not asking this question because I don't understand the distinction. I'm asking this question because it's not often discussed.

If information wants to be free, then what is our objective measure, to define the reason why we might choose to confine some, all or none of our information, especially when employing encryption?
I'm curious, how would you verify an attendee's identity?
Alex Gaynor is the world's biggest white knight. Does he think doing this will get him laid?
Can anyone explain how this works? From previous experience I always thought that this was not possible without some cooperation on the other end because the problem is you want to split the data being sent to you to different ips. If the other end sends all the data to the same ip, you cannot redirect/load balance to other ips before the data actually gets to you. What am I missing?
A New Record for Terahertz Transmission
Sampling from a probability distribution
Show HN: Headline Smasher