skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Oof. Just have them read Numerical Recipes while you're at it. Knuth is great, but it's dense, even when you discount the use of MIX.

Definitely take a look at SICP (http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html) and the related HTDP (http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/HtDP2e/) -- both will require you to get used to Scheme (it's good for you!), but will expose you to the underlying theory of how to compute, which is critical.

Before those two, you could also start with O'Reilly's "Understanding Computation," which is a bit more Ruby-centric than I prefer, but a non-rigorous take on the same subjects. Petzold's "Code" is also a good, non-specialist place to start. (Petzold's "Annotated Turing" is great, but I'd leave it for a while.)

You should read the "Schemer" series (Little, Seasoned, Reasoned) -- again, lots of Scheme, but wonderful if somewhat idiosyncratic reads.

Going back in time, Wirth's "Algorithms + Data Structures = Programs" is a classic in the field, and a pleasure to read.

CLRS' "Intro. to Algorithms" is a foundational text on algorithm analysis and design, though you might also want to try some of the more popular treatments first (O'Reilly has a few good ones). See also Skiena's "Algorithm Design Manual."

The "Dragon Book" (Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools) by Aho, Sethi and Ullman is on every computer scientist's bookshelf for good reason -- it tells you everything you need to know about how the languages you use are built. I also like Holub's "Compiler Design in C," though it's a lot more hands-on.

For understanding OSes, I recommend "The Magic Garden Explained," and Bach's "Design of the UNIX Operating System." Outdated, perhaps, but outstanding in their clarity.

C (yes, you should learn C; like Lisp, it's also good for you even if you only use it rarely): King's "C Programming: A Modern Approach" (though you could start with a popular introduction like O'Reilly's "Head First C"), Plauger's "Standard C Library," Hanson's "C Interfaces and Implementations," and O'Reilly's "Understanding and Using C Pointers," as a start. Van der Linden's "Expert C Programming" is an excellent intermediate text that is also surprisingly readable.

Architecture and design miscellanea: Kernighan's "Practice of Programming," Bentley's "Programming Pearls," McConnell's "Code Complete," and Hunt and Thomas' "Pragmatic Programmer."

I have not yet read, but intend to, Okasaki's "Purely Functional Data Structures."

Make a habit of browsing second-hand bookstores and picking up older computer science books -- they cover by necessity much more foundational issues than most modern books, and do so using simpler architectures and languages. (I have a wonderful text on 68008 programming that has absolutely no practical relevance to the current age, but provides fantastic insights into the nuts and bolts of hardware and OS development.) As a bonus, you'll see how few ideas in computer science are truly new -- as computational bottlenecks shift, theoretical technologies suddenly become practical, or practical ones become outmoded.
The experienced length of your prison sentence would depend on the gravity in the cell where you were kept. After 10 years in that cell a 1,000 years may have passed on earth. Might be a good situation for both the victim (now long dead) and the criminal (start a new life).
An early test ride in Nissan's autonomous car, due in 2020
I understand what she is saying, and actually mostly agree. However...

Teaching and mentoring are not software development. More teaching and mentoring need to be done, but it's not the business I'm in. I'm in the business of making software.

If I have a critical project that must be done right and done on time, I will not hire junior developers for the team. It's nothing against the jr. dev., but in these scenarios I just need the A-Team showing up and I don't have time to setup a training regimen.

Yes, it would be great if there were a good means to train and bring up new developers. Most of the universities in the world are failing to train people to be good developers. Maybe we need a master's of engineering in software development, with a real engineering certification at the end (and not the IEEE bullshit one that has nothing to do with software development). Sure, the top-tier engineering schools like MIT and CMU are putting out good, jr. devs., but most people in the market didn't get to go to one of those schools. Most people went to your run of the mill state school, where nobody cared enough to buck the status quo and fail them out of their classes if they couldn't hack it. That any good developers come out of such a system is despite the system. The pressure to keep graduation rates up has done a monumental disservice to everyone involved.

Sports teams have farm leagues they can run and groom out excellent players. Microsoft and Google and Apple have people throwing themselves at their doorsteps and can cherry pick the best of the best. I'm a freelance consultant trying to make a go of being more than just a freelance consultant. I don't have that kind of time on my projects.

Speaking of which, if you're an excellent developer with experience in .NET, GIS, javascript, and relational databases--and can devote up to 20 hours a week to a project--please contact me through my profile here.
Maybe it's just me, but I've never really thought getting a PhD had to do with money, but instead the result of either extreme curiosity or a very strong passion about a more granular complex topic.

I never understood it to mean a path with a defined cost to equal a defined salary. This scientific equation of years of school to salary just feels foolish.
> you can run their experiments if you have a fedora 15 box

Huh, that is somewhat peculiar choice of platform, considering that F15 has been EOL for 2.5 years
It says in the article she visited every household. That's proper old-school political campaigning. If people voted for her because they thought it would be funny, then they only thought that because she did the legwork.
What about them? Once they're sited and hooked into the lines, replacing the gear inside is not difficult.

The question is whether a regulated monopoly could provide good broadband connectivity at a good price. Equipment upgrade scheduling is an implementation detail.

And it's a detail that is already priced into the service. It should be possible for such a monopoly to provide the same level of connectivity as Verizon or Comcast at lower prices, because for their current prices Verizon and Comcast already provide that level of connectivity plus content and software and marketing.

Big ISPs do everything necessary for connectivity, but they also develop and sell products that run on that connectivity. For example Comcast's on-demand and DVR everywhere solutions compete directly with services like Netflix, HBO Go, NBC.com, ESPN 3, etc. Developing, maintaining, and marketing that costs Comcast a lot of money--money that a connectivity-only monopoly would not need to spend.

It would be like if your electric company owned the lines, owned the power station, and sold you appliances like TVs and washing machines. Instead, electric companies just sell electricity, and everyone else sells you things that use electricity. I can't think of a reason that a similar architecture would not work for the Internet.
First off, if the stress is truly constant, I would advise you to do at least a consultation with a mental health professional. Can't hurt, and no one here has a whole lot of context (we couldn't). My advice for a first step is to uncover why you're stressed feel rage with co-workers. Everyone has different ways of figuring that out, but it sounds like you've given it some thought, and are not sure. Hence, my suggestion.

If you have any relationship issues or anxiety about your upcoming kid (congrats by the way!), that could spill over. When my first was on her way, marriage was all good (still is), and I was excited to be a parent. But I was still nervous as hell, and I'm sure some of that nervousness spilled over to other areas.

However, it seems as if this might be a pattern for you, and so I come back to figuring out why. If you don't figure it out, any change you make is likely to result in the same feelings shortly after you make a change. I put myself through some self directed exercises in a book called What Color Is Your Parachute. It's geared to job seekers, but the first steps in the process are about self discovery. There are probably better tools, but that book was the one I grabbed for whatever reason one day in the bookstore. But anything that gets you thinking about what matters to you will help.

Good luck!
Yep. An entire generation of our society's most educated all in the same boat right now.
Ctrl + F?
Obvious answer:
Tiny companies/Individual contractors (aka temporary workers/consultants/etc) terminate their contracts immediately.

For larger companies you lawyer up and negotiate restitution as per the contract with them.

Longer answer:
You generally get contractors in when you are resource-poor but have the budget for it. The obvious solution is take the development in-house. In real life the answer apparently to get contractors in and deal with the fallout later.

TLDR:
Don't be a nice person, you're in business to get a defined goal completed. "Being Nice" doesn't come into it. "Being Fair" is a different matter though.
For others following along, I would like to point out that my original conclusion was that 1.4 would be required given the explicit statement in the document:

To build Go 1.x, for x ≥ 5, it will be necessary to have
Go 1.4 installed already, in $GOROOT_BOOTSTRAP.

This is subtly different from the statement in the new ports section of the document:

For Go 1.x (x ≥ 5), new ports will have to be done by
cross-compiling test binaries on a working system,
copying the binaries over to the target, and running and
debugging them there.
I think that's the right way to put it.
British Electric Plugs Are Better Than All Other Plugs, and Here's Why
Clean Energy Investment Jumps 16%, Shaking Off Oil’s Drop
Except you won't know if your server ever sent it to Mandrill. :) Always be extremely verbose with logging!
Most professor salaries are on 9-month appointments, for the academic year. The three summer months usually come from grants, teaching summer sessions, or consulting.

However, a professor can choose to spend the grant money on student support rather than summer salary (thus forgoing their own salary), which is what I assume the author is referring to.
Memms.io v2: Share pictures and video from any phone, no app required
Are you talking about 5-10k simultaneous users? It's very subjective depending on the usage profile of your site. The best thing is to pick a service like AWS/Heroku/Cloud Hosting Service that allows you to grow your offering. After you get to a point of profitability, you can look at greater efficiencies like setting up your own hosting hardware depending on your needs, if that makes sense. Our company has grown to a point where we are looking at implementing our own multi-datacenter cloud to save on hosting fees. But that's a good problem to have :D
Robert, I didn't know everyone at Accenture were such great psychologists!
> I did a PhD and a post-doc and have a nice biotech job that pays well

Which works if your field of study is an applied science.

I think that for many in the pure fields there is this sort of romanticized "career in science" that can cloud expectations. As with Margaret in this story, though, they eventually figure it out.
I can't track down the source of the quote (thought it was Noland Bushnell), but "You aren't an entrepreneur until you've made a payroll out of your own pocket".

Interesting, but not surprising, to know that scientists are known to have done this.
China Leads Race to the Moon (and Its Helium-3)
I only did a Master's and avoided the academic route (wasn't interested). My lab peers at the time were 5 PhD students. Of that group at a good Canadian University, 3 are still post-docs (4-6 years after graduation), 1 has a decent-paying research position (non-teaching) and 1 is a faculty member... in the Middle East. Meanwhile, I work in an R&D field alongside many current faculty members, a surprising number of whom are 65+ and will die before they retire.

In general, my observation has been that the students that quit after a Masters tend to do better financially than those who continue on. That's not to say that Master's graduates are hitting the big time; they just tend to end up getting their market value.
They already are; French muslims made it the subject of the friday prayer and are all over the media condemning these actions as anti-islamic.
https://twitter.com/StephaneArnaud_/status/55356335633938432...
It's not uncommon with a certain generation, though it's losing ground to "you-are-ell".
This is nothing new.

I planned on being scientist in genetics/cell bio starting around 10th grade. I worked in laboratories throughout my undergrad years and then got into a prestigious human genetics phd program around 1993.

I first started to see that something was wrong while still an undergrad while working with people smarter than myself that were on their second or third post-doc. I had no desire to be into my career 12 years (phd + 3 2-year post-docs) and still not have a real job.

In graduate school I saw this continued and I also began to see just how much of a crap-shoot having a successful science career in academia was. The young professors on tenure track all had some amazing research during their phd or post-doc(s) but most often it based on something unexpected or novel that they couldn't have predicted.

Finally, when the head of the NIH testified in front of congress that there is a glut of scientists and that he couldn't recommend to anyone to go into science I decided to drop out.

I've had a great career since then outside of science but there are times when I miss it. I especially miss being around people much smarter than myself and driven purely by curiosity and the desire for knowledge. And I miss doing original research solving a fundamental question about life that is completely unknown and that can't just be googled.

And there are times when I get tired of the software industry and its man-children and its lack of seriousness... I know that everything we do isn't pointless and I've worked on some interesting cutting edge government/military projects that had mixed academic/industry teams, but it saddens me that so many of the smartest people in the software industry are working on essentially marketing/advertising projects. Google has become the blackhole for researchers that Microsoft Research used to be in the late-90s.

I'm not as negative as my post probably comes across as. I do like what I do and I have made friends with people in the software industry that are closer to my mindset than the norm. But it would have been nice to have been able to stay in science and have a better chance at being able to support myself and a family.
If it weren't for our current economic system, having a glut of lawyers, doctors, scientists, engineers, etc, would be an incredibly good thing. For everyone.
If you accept the axiom that some administrative tasks are pointless and unnecessary, then there are two ways for academics to avoid doing them.

They can refuse to do them. Eliminate the pointless, unnecessary task, and accept the non-consequence of not doing it.

They can hire a professional administrator to do it. Naturally, the administrator will in turn hire an underling to perform all the unnecessary tasks, and retain all vital tasks for himself. But now that the administrator has an employee, that creates an additional management burden, to ensure that person is doing the pointless unnecessary tasks correctly and before the deadline.

It is clear that professional administrators and academics have different incentives with regard to administrative overhead. One would prefer to see it grow without bound, whereas the other would prefer to see it shrink to its minimum viable size.

The colossal mistake that too many organizations have made in the past is to allow the administrators to control the administrative budget. That is the one thing that absolutely cannot be delegated away from the people doing the core work of the business.
How Hard Is Entrepreneurship? Nothing Comes Easy
It would help our theory of black holes if they simply were impossible. There are still some paradoxes that physicists are working out.

Her "black holes don't exist" paper would be similar to an old-timey person saying "Planets don't orbit in perfect circles like we expect them to, so planets don't exist."
Friendly and constructive criticism; I cannot bear to watch these because of the horrendously bad audio. Get someone who knows how to do proper audio recording to advise you guys!

:-)
It seems strange to me that people assume that more education in any field they want will necessarily result in more money.

Schools are producing too many Biology Phds. Or Forensic Science undergrads. Such is life. There's no way to predict 100% what the market will be like, so we make do. There's no intrinsic right to a job in the field that one chooses to study, and most people work in fields outside of their major.

It's also true that your choice of first (or second or third) job is no guarantee. GM used to be a job for life. Now it isn't. As individuals we make our best choices, and then have a small safety net to fall back on if we're wrong.

The only thing we should push for schools to do is show transparency on where the alums wind up, because unfortunately their incentives in producing Phds (and JDs and Russian literature degrees) differ from ours in receiving them.
You're very right. Most electronics are from bad or undervolted caps.

The only thing to make sure is to put caps in the same polarity as the dead one (assuming polarity of said caps; some dont).
Where I am (Canada), at least, doctors and lawyers will end up at their final positions with much more certainty than someone seeking a faculty position and they'll pay their debt off a lot faster.
Berlin has excellent transit throughout most of its metropolitan area, and it's a large, low-density city.
One of the best ways to grow as a developer is to build something, destroy it, and build it again. We all have the thought "what other ways can I build this?" in our heads as we're building a project. Most times I have seven different ways to do something, and the hardest part is just picking one. So, in my opinion, a great interview question would be "how else could you have built this?". It shows that the developer weighed the choices that we all inevitably have.
Once the two event horizons overlap the two black holes will necessarily merge. The "peanut shaped" event horizon of the new black hole will become ellipsoidal as the black hole emits copious gravitational waves. This happens in approximately the time it takes light to travel a Schwarzschild radius. For a supermassive black hole, this could be on the order of a few seconds.

This is a consequence of the no-hair theorem. The no-hair theorem states that the only possible stable black holes are Schwarzschild, Kerr, and Kerr-Newman black holes, which are all ellipsoidal in shape (or spherical in the case of a Schwarzschild black hole). When the event horizons overlap the new black hole has a decidedly non-ellipsoidal shape, so it has to become ellipsoidal and it does this through the emission of gravitational waves. Fittingly, this process is known as "balding."
No need to construct forms manually, Rails form helpers take care of authenticity tokens automatically.
Not brilliant to ensure a good fraction of your smartest citizens are effectively unable to reproduce.
> Point-to-point microwave latency should be the same as fiber latency at the same distance.

Actually, it's often less because the microwave travels in a straight line while the fiber has to follow the utility poles or trenches (which often aren't in a straight line due to right of way issues). High frequency traders performing latency arbitrage use microwave dishes instead of fiber because it's a fraction of a second faster than using fiber connections on a cross-country connection.

Microwave dish systems are, however, a nightmare to support because transmission can be affected by the weather, birds, and a whole lot of other things. They also aren't very high bandwidth, and if you have a lot of dishes that means a lot of interference. I'd say they're perfectly fine for things like extending your LAN to your cabin up on a mountaintop, but not great tech to run an ISP off of (though people still try).
I routinely forego summer salary in order to make sure the students are fed. This works because I receive a perfectly adequate 9-month salary from the state (and also my household has two incomes).
Hmm, good point. Looks like I was overthinking things.
Not a physicist but I'd guess nothing would happen when the event horizons touch as the black holes themselves are point objects at the center of thoses spheres. So neither's mass would be within the event horizon of the other. When the central point of the smaller black hole crossed the event horizon of the larger I guess they would merge.

Just a slightly informed guess. Would love to know the answer from an expert.
Regardless of who you are, it's very likely that at some point in your life you'll want love, rest time, a family, financial security.

Being a scientist offers nearly none of those things.
Most educated? Yes.

Most intelligent? No.

Smart people have been shunning science and academia since the 90s. The best and brightest work on Wall Street and they do tend to have kids--their genes for intelligence do pass on.

It is very encouraging to hear that people who make dumb life choices are being prevented from reproducing their foolish genes.

Maybe in a few generations no one will be stupid enough to work for a boss that doesn't reward them, and then we will have reform.

Downvote me all you want. You can't handle the truth.
> Let me give an example — say a new coder had somehow, impossibly, in their first month of coding, created an app that would save the planet, plunging us into a permanent state of world peace and 100% clean energy. What’s the first thing that you as a senior developer would say to that person before seeing or testing their project? Let me guess — you’re thinking, “Is it responsive?”

I thoughtt "Oh, cool".
FWIW, I've only seen the first one (the one with Tom Stuart) a few months ago, but I enjoyed it.
Sure, but from the wan side? Why on earth would anyone want that?
I accidentally started to think seriously about your quip, and I think it belies the profound difficulty of the problem. I would contend that it's not obvious that we can do better than random elections.

There's all sorts of perverse and misaligned incentives otherwise. I'm not politician or historian, so I'd love some insight into the consequences of such a system. Intuitively, I would assume it'd just implode from incompetance, but bureaucracies are shockingly resilient on government scales. And I'd have no idea how to reliably find qualified individuals; the USA has a long history of effective leaders coming from seemingly random backgrounds. (Whether these individuals did good or not, well, that's hotly debated to this day... I don't often grok politics.)