skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There aren't many perfect jobs out there.

This. After jumping between five jobs (plus some consulting work) over seven or eight years, I've been with the same company for almost eight years now. It is hardly perfect. We screw up process, which in turn leads to buggy products. Product management often doesn't understand the technical limitations of our platforms. Sometimes the projects just plain suck. But the culture is really great, and keeps me there. We get ample PTO, and I can take up to four weeks at a time. I can work remotely when necessary. I have a flexible schedule (unless a client demand requires my presence).

I enjoy coding and building stuff, but I also enjoy the other things in my life. My employer's willingness to understand that covers over a multitude of little things that otherwise might make me leave.
Expressing outrage at extraneous facts surrounding a widespread unethical conspiracy to screw workers, should not earn you a pretentious lecture about compartmentalising your emotions.
Naturally some companies are better than others. You want to find a manager who thinks of himself as your equal rather than your slaver.

This is key. The first sin of management is to think they're managing people. Innovation comes from collaboration among talented equals trying to solve a real problem in the world, not from someone bestowing his unique vision upon the masses and giving them the privilege of working for him. It is the latter attitude that I find the best predictor of whether there's going to be endless frustration at a company.
They don't have findings yet. They are predicting 17% conversion. After a year or so, we'd have to revisit this group to see what happened. At that point, it would be fair to take the "Future Founder" label into account.

Probably, they should compare the #351-700 cohort's prediction against actual to the "Future Founder" prediction against actual.
The difference between width: auto; and width: 100%;
Unfortunately, with security, you have to "get everything right all of the time" because the attacker only has to get their attack right once.
The notion that terms like "monad" are nothing but shibboleths is very common and completely misguided. Instead, these terms are used for a couple of very good reasons.

First, the simple reason that they are accurate terms for which there are no good replacements. The English language does not have the necessary scope to cover the relevant abstractions. This leaves you with two options: use the accurate term from mathematics, or make up some new term. Either way the term will be something new to most people, and making something up does not provide any value.

This leads me to the second reason: the mathematical terms actually do provide additional value. If you are working with monoids and do some Googling, you can discover a wealth of information that is directly applicable in practice, for example you can learn that List is the initial monoid [1]. You don't have to learn any of this, it's completely optional, but if you do choose to explore it you can get real benefits. Renaming monads "workflows" would prevent you from gaining those benefits, and would not get you anything in exchange other than making the people who are scared of math more comfortable.

[1] An example of why this is useful to know: http://byorgey.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/foldr-is-made-of-mon...

Also this post from the wiki, though it's a bit heavier on the theory: http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Free_structure
I guess I'm in the minority, but I think Facebook is a fascinating parent for Oculus.

Oculus has a technology head start, but that only gives them maybe a couple years on the cheap duplicators. In order to gain a strategic foothold their real competition is in their "app store"/content portal aspirations. They're in a race to see whose virtual space you start in when you put on your VR headset.

But in that realm they are competing with Sony, Microsoft, and Valve, all of whom have large user bases already using their portals. On that battle Oculus is at a severe disadvantage. By joining Facebook they have a network of users they can plug into, and a much bigger one than their competitors at that.

Second, Oculus is run by hardware and software engineers. They have an extraordinary team in that regard, which has allowed them to hire and expand in those areas very fast and still keep the talent bar high.

In order to build a compelling portal in a totally unmapped design language, they need world class UX and social designers. Because they are so engineering heavy, I don't think they would have an easy time identifying and integrating those people as an independent company, even with Andreesen/Horowitz pulling strings for them.

Facebook already has some great, productive, battle hardened UX teams, and I suspect they have many of the best social designers in the world. By selling to Facebook, Oculus is taking that huge question mark off the table.

In exchange they've taken on the question mark of possibly fading into obscurity in an indifferent parent organization. That's a roll of the dice. But the worst care scenario for them is they quit and start over with a LOT of cash, a rockstar reputation, and a knowledge of exactly what their acquired ghost company is organzationally incapable of doing.

And lastly, I don't think Palmer cares if HE wins. He wants to pull as much resources into the VR project as he can. Full stop. He'd happily sacrifice his company to do that. If Valve wins and he quits Facebook having failed to make it work there, he'll boot into Steam VR with a huge smile on his face knowing that he won.
Firechat: chat with others without the Internet
Wake up! Don't be loyal because a company will never be loyal to you when the time comes.

Do your best, be proud of your work, but do it only for yourself, not for any company. At the end of the day, you're a number on a balance sheet.
Employees are 'the company.' Screwing over your employees is not in the companies best, long term interests.
Setting this flag on a cookie means it can't be accessed from JavaScript, so a malicious script won't be able to determine your session (for instance).
most startups have bogus business plan: the recession is worldwide, and the web2.X gold rush is about selling productivity to startups (mainly).
Like in the gold rush the one who are making actual money are not the one digging gold but the landlord selling the "startup ground" (incubators), and the companies selling the tools to dig.
Secondly whatever they say no silver bullets appeared in the last 10 years: the mythical good developers with a productivity = 10x average (quantity & quality) are still a resource. They are scarce, I have met some, I don't belong to them. As a result, business plan relies for their costing on a resource that is very unpredictable. As a result companies relying too much on "new technologies" based their hiring policy on a brute force attack.

Wait, you tell me there are a lot of devs on the market?
No, there are a lot of clueless young people on the market with a huge student loan that studied CS but that maybe the worst developer ever but have a strong incentive to get hired (cheat): they have to reimburse their loans before they sleep under the bridge.

So, brute force attack require to hire a lot of expensive broken arms. If I were a recruiter, I would never hire a student with a loan to refund that young I would prefer an autodidact that understand the basic of economy: don't spend money you don't have and don't be a sheep.

Lastly the money for startups even if QE is turning in all worldwide economies is not there!
Central banks are printing bank notes like mad men (China, Japan, US, Europe...) but this money is directly used in stock options and the bank never landed that few money (or when they do the compound interests are just mad). And public and private debts are fucking high. The economy is on the brink of a bubble explosion for which new startup are responsible.

So there is no money to turn startup that don't master their costing/pricing in real companies. (no money available on the credit market)

Yes basically startups is a phony ecosystem.

My advice: have balls.

Go for companies that do not label them startups that seems «unsexy», even with lower wages, and accept the job after you accept and understand their mission/business model.

Maybe helping family planning communicate better on their mission can be more satisfying in life than helping a delusive «self made man» have is first million before 25 based on a ponzi scheme (buying tools to startups that buys me tools without generating new products is a little mad, isn't it?).
As with the Snowden leaks, I have to wonder if the number of fully aware collaborators in this crime would be more easily counted in tens, hundreds, or thousands.

I previously thought in this specific case that it would be tens, but if entire departments were being lectured about the penalties for deviation - were hundreds of people aware?
New Developer Experiences on Google Cloud Platform
>When I make mistakes, which I often do, I don't go around thinking oh, darn, they should have known that for me.

Well, you should! These are mind numbing details that are best taken care of by other people. I am too concerned with building a good product to want to spend too much time going over mind numbing details.

The argument from "I become a more well rounded developer" is valid, but these should be things you learn once and then stop worrying about forever. There's a lot of magic in Rails, but it all goes away given enough time. Better abstractions are our bread and butter and we'll get nothing done if we continue to shy away from them.
Not embeddable, from the start
KING: New York Stock Quote: -10% from pricing
The argument is that making things too simple is what kills you. The defaults are not secure and you need to take steps to make sure you are secure. This is one area where frameworks are huge plus. Good ones ship with security conscious defaults.
Let's see, one involves spamming people who don't care, the other only involves people who do.. [shit]Ville spam games aren't social gaming, they are anti-social gaming.

Not to mention, what is the context of this discussion? Rift. What does Rift have to do with [shit]Ville spam games? Fuck all.
This is a nice example what Haskell can do, but the sort itself is quite inefficient and it's not a true quicksort.
Breue – The Screening Room for Products
And then you can work to stop making short-sighted decisions and implementing poor management practices, because you can identify the bullshit.
It's amazing how they fund everything they do. I'll buy redbull over their competitors specifically because of their F1 teams and Felix Baumgartner's Stratos jump.
Hey HN!

Zach from Breue here.

Breue started as Headlinr - a billboard for startup and product launches. Well, it was actually a curated list of useful good looking products.

From the products rejected on Headlinr, many of the founders reached out to us, asking how they could improve their products. We noticed a pattern of designers and coders unsure of what to build and how to launch their products.

So, we put together a little experiment called the Screening Room and ran it for a week. The results were spectacular. It became clear where we needed to focus our time and energies.

So, we built Breue.

Typically, we try to get product advice and feedback by posting somewhere online where people can see it. You receive a bunch of mixed advice. Only a few people give you good advice and feedback. And you have to deal with snark and hateful remarks.

Breue is a community where people give you the best advice and direction they can on your vision, business, product, product flaws, etc. So far, there has been zero snark. There are no remarks like "looks cool" or "sounds interesting". Just really helpful, worthwhile, invaluable stuff.

We've put together an amazing community of smart talented people who want to learn from and help each other out. As a member of the community, you get to engage with other smart talented people. You get to see, read, and hear things that others don't. You get to help shape things.

Please take a minute to read testimonials by founders of products showcased on Breue:

http://breue.com/stories

I'm here to answer any questions from the HN community!
11 game. Clone of 2048 game with small numbers.
"How Chrome DevTools does it" was not my answer to the question, it was just the preamble. As mentioned, I much prefer to have caching disabled while I'm building or debugging sites (specifically: because I'm often changing the markup or the css or the javascript, and I want my most recent change to come through to the browser upon reload).
This wasnt across an industry...this was between two companies...apple and google.

Even still your analogy is still wrong...you are talking about banana consumers (which inherently will always go for the cheapest banana products that satisfy their needs) vs. a business who is trying to keep their costs down to remain competitive.

There is an saying that everything in business should be viewed from the eyes of the consumer. If the consumer is getting the same product for cheaper and the business model is still viable (aka the business can sustain that price) then it's a net win.

Again in your example, banana producers will lower their prices until they cannot be viable and thus they will stop supplying bananas. You cannot collude enough to keep failing business models in business.
On Oculus Rift and Facebook's grand acquisitions
Brooks Brothers calls theirs "Digital Tailoring", but apparently it is from an industry-sponsored company [TC]², and first offered by Levi's.

If anything being sponsored by its industry, like a technology standards authority, should make it less likely to make exclusive agreements.

However, some of the examples I've seen of the clothes include issues that a tailor would have fixed, like a roll between your neck and shoulders. Maybe it works like a Flowbee does for haircuts, and it just applies a consistent offset from your body, rather than understanding which areas should be close fitting or loose. That the descriptions talk about precision to fractions of a millimeter makes it sound naive about what matters to a skilled tailor.

However, it doesn't sound like there is anything preventing multiple users from using the same measurements, whether they make suits, jeans, undergarments, or wetsuits.
Let me put it this way: imagine the derision, scorn, and hatred heaped upon furries, /a/utists, Tumblrites, bronies, MMORPG addicts, and all other sorts of low-status netizens who are already perceived as overly escapist, and who thus get labeled "faggots" and beaten up for their lunch money. Now multiply it by a rather large quantity. In fact, you might have to outright square it.

That is how people are going to act towards those who deliberately cut themselves off from real life to spend time on VRs. There is going to be bullying among children and harassment among adults (but I repeat myself). There will be lawsuits and alarmist attempts at legislation.

Now, I don't really think either side of this coming dichotomy is healthy or correct. I think that escapism is fun, but it's not real life, but it is a strict subset of valid ways to spend real-life time. However, if your prediction bears out, that dichotomy is going to form.
Yes! As long as you're consistent.
The right way to think about the system would be to simply expand the acceptable hiring pool. The hyper selectivity that big SV companies use for hiring artificially limits the pool of possible applicants and drives up wages. Expanding the pool would solve this problem without going into illegal practices.
However, it seems after a year or two in the company, the honeymoon period ends and the only thing I can see is the bullshit coming out of management's mouth. Bogus business plans, inability to close deals, short-sighted decisions, petty management techniques, overly frequent pivots, you name it...

Those are signs that it's a good idea to move on. Yes, this is common. Sturgeon's Law: 90 Percent of Everything Is Crap.

For me, it tends to happen after 3-6 months. I'm pretty good at detecting bullshit and it's a curse because it's hard to be motivated when you lose faith in the people above.

Am I 1/ Bad at choosing my jobs, 2/ Too demanding towards the companies that hire me, 3/ Mentally unstable, 4/ Unrealistic, 5/ Just a normal bullshit intolerant guy ?

A mix of #1 and #5. Definitely not #3, if you can hold a job for 1-2 years. #2, #4 are what "they" want you to think. (Ever notice how the Boomer whining about Gen-X/Millennial entitlement sounds extremely entitled itself?) Those are subjective calls (over what is "too demanding") but I think that if you can hold your rage well enough to keep a job for 2 years, the problem isn't with you.

You'll get better at choosing jobs as you get older, because you learn the warning signs and get better at finding good people. Then you'll just talk to people you trust to get the true story of what's happening at a company.

Is there any way I can find a boss I respect beyond a couple of years?

Well, there's no 100% reliable way. You have to take risks on people just like they are taking risks on you. However, you get better at this over time.
:) I was ignoring the privacy aspect, it was more the goggles-to-goggles, someone hasn't thought that through.
I had the opposite experience. It seemed really finicky about how smoothlyI had to move my tablet from one wall to the next .
I agree that if you took the perspective of management, that you'd understand more of where they're coming for and cut them a little more slack. However, I still doubt that you could forgive them for all of this stuff - "Bogus business plans, inability to close deals, short-sighted decisions, petty management techniques, overly frequent pivots, you name it...".

> Instead of asking yourself "does this management know what it's doing?" ask yourself "does this management make me better as a professional?" If you can say "yes" to the second question, the answer to the first question doesn't matter. The company can fail, but if you come out of it better than you came in, you still succeeded.

The question isn't "did they make me better?". It's "did they make me better than the best alternative". Opportunity cost. Working for a shitty company might make you better as a professional, but not better than your alternatives.
Alumni list for my university has been helpful.
This reminds me of a similar idea I'd like to see. A smart tracer that keeps track of function call args and results and possibly local variables in a cache. Then when your program crashes, it can show you not just the backtrace but also recently called functions that may have influenced the crash. With such a tool you may be able to debug some crashes without a debugger at all.
You can't just blindly pretend any future versions of all your dependencies will work without updating your code. APIs change.

If you have a risk of arbitrary changes in APIs happening in any minor update, your infrastructure and dependency management are fundamentally flawed and ongoing development will always be difficult. There is nothing unique to Haskell about this, it's just software development 101, separating interface from implementation and all that jazz.

There does seem to be a surprising... I'm not sure how to describe it, maybe a lack of respect?... for this principle in parts of the Haskell community, given the same community's obvious general preference for correctness and being sure everything fits together in a controlled way.

Of course sometimes you want to make major changes to an API and maybe they break backward compatibility, but usually that is a Big Deal in software development, it doesn't normally just get done in some quick point release along with a couple of bug fixes and a security patch.

I had constant problems with pip. Because it will blindly install the latest 'foo' dependency even though the API changed and now my app is broken.

Not that I'm doubting you, but I do find that experience surprising. I work with Python all the time, on different kinds of projects but typically always using pip for package management, and I can't immediately think of a single time that's happened to me. Of course, you can also tell pip to install only within a specific version range if you ever need to.
Exactly, you could call it the trickle-down effect.

If you apply for a job at a start-up they can say "Hey, an engineer at Google makes this much, you're not as good, so you're going to make 25% less, and since this is a start-up we're going to take another 25% off.".

Look at AngelList and the salaries being offered. Isn't is strange that the majority of salaries top out at the same amount, and the amount of equity on offer seems to be the same too.

Smells like something fishy going at the VCs to price fix wages of start-up worker bees...
I also boycott Sony.

Guess I'm not going to be getting any first-gen VR headset, unfortunately.
Most startups fail. Most entrepreneurs are likely very poor managers who end up stuck in that role because they happened to be the founders. What you're describing is pretty common.

I think the best bet if you're the type of person who can't help but care too much is to just keep trying. Eventually you should find a founder who is a better breed - although you'll only ever know once some pressure builds. You can't measure a founder at the start - only when money is low or something isn't going well.

Alternatively, give it a shot and start up your own company. It's hard but at least you'll be the terrible manager doing frequent pivots.
So always choose PHP?
We can determine from this story that Apple's corporate email system in 2007 was wholly insecure. If one user can view and forward another users email, the system is broken.
She should contact a labor attorney and probably has a strong case.
You have an obvious lack of respect for the difficulty of running the business side of a business:

>> Bogus business plans, inability to close deals, short-sighted decisions, petty management techniques, overly frequent pivots, you name it...

This presents a killer opportunity for personal growth: go start your own business. You'll either learn that you are a masterful business planner, only making high-minded long-term decisions & closing deals left and right, and you'll be super successful.

OR you will grow as a person and learn that there are at least two sides to every business decision.

Either way, you'll grow as a person through the experience.
Learning to Build Abstractions in Quartz Composer
This is exactly the point -- when you're developing a site, you want caching disabled on that site, but then when you're browsing another site just as a regular surfer you do not want caching disabled. Since generally when you're working on a site, you have DevTools opened, and generally when you're just browsing the web you do not have DevTools open, this is very nice.
AppStore link: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/roomscan-app-that-draws-floo...

Couldn't find it on my brief scan of the article.
I worded it unfortunately, but we're getting at the same thing.

What I mean to say is the easier it becomes for everyone to get everything right all of the time the more likely it is to occur.

Expecting everyone to individually know and understand every single gotcha is unrealistic compared to distributing the work load across a framework.
The World Holds Suicidal America Hostage