skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The latest FF builds have been rock solid for me (Win7 x64 with 4 or 5 big name extensions and that's it).

I've currently got about 130 tabs open, FF is using ~ 1.1GB of RAM and has been sitting open & running in this state for 3 or 4 weeks with no problems or slow downs whatsoever. The plugin container also finally works reliably so shitty sites with buggy flash code don't take the browser down when flash decides to blow up. FF's PDF implementation has also gotten better and it's now rare (as in I can't remember the last time) that I need to jump out to Acrobat reader to get a properly rendered view of a PDF.

FF starts faster than Chrome, font rendering is a lot better and it seems most of the "weird" HTML issues I encounter these days doing webdev stuff are with Chrome rather than FF.

I don't understand why Firefox isn't crushing Chrome.

Edit: Latest FF mobile on Android is awesome too.
I've just recently switched back to Firefox as part of an effort to eliminate as many Google products from my life as possible, and it's a really nice browser. I had no idea Firefox's market share had fallen so far.
I think you should! This is actually quite common (although not by McDonalds) where I live, in Amsterdam:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Distributeurs-febo.jp...
K-Cups inventor: ‘I feel bad sometimes that I ever did it’
This is a shame - Browser Wars II...

Having any company have dominance (be it Microsoft, Apple, Google, whatever) is dangerous for the open web. I don't look forward to walled gardens again where "This site only works with X" becomes prevalent.
We thought so too. But the (nearly) resume-blind process we settled on quickly converged on a nearly all sleeper candidate pipeline; in several years, we hired I think just 2 people that had our field on their resume. We didn't just retain all those candidates: we were knocked on our asses by how well they performed.

Recruiting is two problems: outreach and qualification. We did novel things on both fronts. For this thread, I just want to be pointing out: the changes we made to qualification were critical, instrumental, fundamental to our success. Most of our best hires could not have happened had we qualified candidates the way we did in 2009, and the way most firms do today.
I think there are valid points to both sides. Yes, clearly there is a problem (I don't think the problem is unique to tech), but if you constantly live in fear of the consequences of actions which you never take, you're really stuck in an endless cycle.

If you report an incident to the police and if they find evidence of sexual assault, what company or coworker is going to apologize for them or criticize you? Especially if they get convicted.

I can see how it poses a much greater issue when it's a "he-said she-said" scenario, but still, I think you need to at least try to escalate the issue. If you receive disbelief or even retribution for reporting it, then you leave the company and share your experience.
Oh, I guess I read too quickly. Comments on those sites really are terrible.
I am still a firefox user...but I don't want to be.

I will admit the whole Eich thing, when we was promoted I quickly lost my attachment to Mozilla - they clearly were not the organization I thought they were. But aside from that Firefox seems to be the worst of all choices - the only thing keeping me attached to it is the lack of an open source alternative.

Chrome seems to be far ahead in terms of security (XSS protection, Sandboxing etc.) and in many cases appears to be faster - but I don't trust an advertising company with my browser.

I think we need a fresh contender - an open browser, built from the start with an understanding of the security and privacy lessons we have learned over the last 30 years. I'm not sure how realistic that dream is, but I believe it is worth the thought.
On the contrary. The worst programmer I've worked with was the one who insisted that debuggers were a sign of a bad programmer and one should be able to fix problems without them. Not only was he negative-productivity himself, but since he was fairly senior and many of the other developers were quite junior and listened to him, he lowered the productivity of the entire team.
> instead of the standard library, you get your algorithms from PDF's you have to pay a journal access fee for

A sign of a good programmer, but not a good engineer IMO.
Cohesion and coupling certainly are not synonyms.

Cohesion is about how much the code within a single module deals with the same or closely related concerns, so that behaviour "belongs together". High cohesion is usually considered desirable.

Coupling is about how much multiple modules depend on each other. For example, do they communicate only via a clearly defined interface, or do they have implicit dependencies like sharing memory or resources? Loose (i.e., low) coupling is usually considered desirable.
I've been playing for a couple years now. Easily one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played. The amount of complexity that's hidden in something seemingly so simple so really rewarding to me. I've only managed to get to around 14-11k so far, but I'm looking forward to progressing as I get older in life!
Ask HN: Can I have 15 mins of your time for 15 of mine to try an experiment?
Hi HN. I'm asking for a few of you to join me in a 30 minute Google hangout.

Format
First, 15 minutes would be of you walking through our product with myself and a few devs from our team. We're looking for honest candid feedback on our product's first time experience from sophisticated users. The second half is your 15 minutes to ask me anything in a 1 on 1.

Here is the signup form: http://bit.ly/1AU587C

This will be fun. Now for some FAQ

Q: What is the experiment?
A: I'm going to try and do two 1-1s a day. We're going to take the feedback from that day's 1-1 and use that to drive what features our growth team builds for the day. Hopefully the next day we've rolled out improvements and getting fresh advice, incrementally making product better each day.

Q: What kind of things can I provide advice on you ask?
A: I've been programming for ~10 years. I went through YC. I've raised a few rounds of capital and lucky to have a built a great team. I probably could best answer things related to my experiences in YC (applications, interviewing, etc), raising capital from angels and VCs, product stuff, recruiting, operating a company, getting your first job in programming/at a startup, etc. I wouldn't make huge life-altering decisions based on my answers but hopefully by sharing my experiences, you'll have another perspective on what ever questions are on your mind.

Q: Why the secrecy?
A: I hope you've never seen our product. If we told you before the session and tried it out, it would corrupt the experiment. Once we meet in the 1-1, I'll first introduce myself so you'll get to know everything about me and the product.

Q: What will you do after the experiment.
A: I plan to write about it and let others know how it went. I'd like to anonymously share my experience/notes from each 1-1 (with your permission).

Q: When will the 1-1s happen?
A: I'd like to do one at 10:00 PST and and other at 10:30 PST. We can do it any day that works best for you.
OK, I get the point you are making. My take on this is the following:

The problem of someone using another person in a cruel and harsh manner will not be solved until you resolve the problem of massive power differentials in society. In general, when a man has money/power equal to the next 100000 people (literally worth 100000 times more than the next person in our capitalistic language), why on earth wouldn't he think he can use this 1/100000th of a person for his personal satisfaction? It is functionally no different than eating chicken.

The problem is not one of gender but one of power. The solution is NOT to see women differently, but to make society so that no person (or employer, let's not forget the huge power differential between an employee and employer) is worth so many more times another person that it warps their view of the other's worth.

Can we bring back labor unions already?
Few people can believe that there are as many as 386,356,909,593 games on the tiny 2x2 board. Needless to say, nothing is pruned there either. A game could visit as many as 48 of the legal positions and have dozens of passes (but only 2 consecutive ones, which ends the game).
My mum always told me not to extrapolate so I'm not very worried about Computer World's alarmist forecasts of Firefox going the way of the typewriter and Smallpox.

That said, while I'm a fan of Firefox - I have used it since it was called Phoenix and I had unzip it off a CD I got with a magazine - I can't help but think this is partially their own fault. Sure, Google has a massive advertising budget for Chrome, and they do their best to ensure that Google products perform best on Chrome - but Firefox is slow to react, and slow to implement - and perhaps unsure of what people actually want?

We continually get useless features - the social API, the "share" button (no one can look at me with a straight face and tell me that shouldn't be an addon, surely), a redesign which takes away features - while actual useful features that Chrome has had for seven years - like per tab processes and chromeless app windows - are still nowhere to be seen. It took Firefox years to get private browsing, and then years again for it to let us do it at the same time as regular browsing. They really need to be faster moving.
Wow, nice find. The dismissive contempt half of the commenters have for the 12-year-old girl who meticulously researched and wrote this article is appalling but not surprising.
Yeah, that what I'm asking (in a really bad way). I wonder, given a list of positions, how long it would take to build the transitions between them. I would imagine 19x19 would be a "practically forever" type thing.
I don't think Mozilla is naive enough to think that your average user cares about open source. But it is one of their core philosophies and not something that they will abandon.
I asked Rob on twitter a while ago if they'd ever do cans for vending machines, and they said its on their roadmap.
You know that most newspapers are written to a 12-year-old reading level, and staff journalists are copyedited too?
Would Apache Samza fold in here better, perhaps?
It's just an open problem in combinatorics. Plenty of math doesn't have a specific utility associated with the problems.
I'd challenge everyone who hasn't seen this in the workplace to talk to their close female friends about the issue. You may be surprised by their stories!
I upvoted you because I suspect that your first two sentences are true.

You completely lost me with the extraordinary causation/situation tangent, though I'm not sure if it is because I disagree with you or because I am misunderstanding you.
The middle east is where the vast majority of geopolitical conflict happens these days and the middle eastern powerhouses (Saudis, Iran, etc) are the ones driving the price down. I doubt they'd do this if it created a security risk internally.

So I'm curious what ripple effect you expect might happen as a result of this decline? South American oil countries? Africa?
Most likely the New York police department you spoke with were under strict orders to reduce the number of reported muggings in their area. Police officers in NYC boroughs have reported the requirements that they refuse to take reports, when the statistics are not in their departments best interest. I have no comment on the relevance to the canonical issue, but this friction you speak about from your mugging is due to corruption, not normalcy.
At the time, Mozilla was savaged by both the far left and far right. Both sides called for boycotts.

The comments in this story appear to be from the right in this case. I guess the left lost interest (not surprising since they got what they demanded, for Eich to be removed - or maybe just leftists don't read that website).
In the UK increases in tuition fees (by up to 3x) has had no effect on the diversity of university applicants. This is because repayments are income linked (and have an income floor) so that a graduate on a low income makes no repayments at all. Only those who earn a large salary will make significant repayments.

If tuition is funded by the government then this will force those without a university education to subsidise those who do go to university. Also university places would have to be limited to control costs.
Firefox is and for the forseeable future will continue to be the best browser for those concerned with privacy. It may be marginalized, but it won't go away. With Electrolysis coming along nicely and Servo on the distant horizon, Firefox can probably also retake the crown as undisputed most secure browser at some point. They're also doing a decent job of keeping performance competitive.

Overall, Firefox seems about as healthy as you could expect given that it's competing against Microsoft, Apple, and Google.
Could that be Servo? I think maybe, but it is way too early to tell.
I'd like to say having worked in both Canada and New Zealand over 18 odd years now and I've never seen anything like this also. I read these articles and I'm simply stunned. I keep wondering what the heck is going on in companies/cultures/environments for these things to happen.

Every time I read an article along these lines I feel even more grateful to work in environments where there haven't been glass ceilings, hiring is on merit and the workplaces are incredibly diverse.
Subroutines are not "named blocks of code" any more than they are facilitators of code reuse. Inline comments around a block of code also matches the concept of a named block of code.

The point of subroutines is to gather the code that implements a particular concept, abstraction or algorithm in one place. Sometimes it coincides with code reuse or splitting your function into a bunch of smaller ones.

The best way to tell if you are using subroutines effectively is if you can explain the effect of the subroutine without describing the implementation of it or (when splitting up a function) what it is trying to achieve for the function that calls it. If you can only describe it in relation to the function calling it, you fail. If you achieve code reuse and it's more than a line of code you get an automatic passing grade, it's just not necessarily a good grade.
Python borrows list comprehensions from Haskell, but the syntax is used in a less powerful way. I wouldn't want to use non-builtin monads in a language without a compile-time type system (one of the usual advantages of monads is they save you a lot of effort testing, but this wouldn't be true in Python), but there's no reason you couldn't.

(If you want an object-oriented language with proper monads then use Scala)
5.3 is actually not bad code, if it refers to what I think it does. Basically:

"Recursive subroutines that concatenate/sum to [...] a carry-along output variable"

Is an accumulator pattern, which is useful in converting certain types of recursive algorithms into tail recursive algorithms with can be handled much better by most compilers (and unrolled into iteration behind the scenes, which means you get clean recursive code that still won't ever run out of stack memory).
So who then? The Eich incident was probably the only incident I can think of where Mozilla did a bad (if that). Consider Eich contributing to a campaign (admittedly a very bad one), vs all the bad things that came out of The Microsoft and Google dominated years. It's not like you are picking between TWC and EFF. The alternatives are much more willing to corrupt the web to make a buck.
This is a good systematic approach.

It strikes me that in the same day (albeit one filled with hiring articles) we get an article about the success of Greyston Bakery, which will literally hire anyone and train and support them as much as needed to be successful—and this, which is along similar lines but is about software development, which, obviously, requires special aptitude that not just anyone can succeed at, and must be protected from those who would trick us into getting hired. /s

Somehow, it feels warm and fuzzy to support the social justice of the little bakery that could, but when it comes to our own companies, our true colors shine.

Continue to take the systematic approach. It is still the best way. Of course, of course you should hire as effectively as possible, and try to have a baseline of aptitude, but there are always going to be outliers and bad fits. It's far more effective to optimize your system for the success of all employees than to focus on weeding out the 'bad ones.' Sure, there will be people that won't fit your system, but they made it through the hiring process for some reason—figure out their true aptitude and transfer them to something they'll be effective at.

The article may be wrong about the existence of fakes and bad programmers—anyone who has filed through a stack of resumes knows that—but it's right on the unreasonableness of the fear and the weight we give it.

I say it all the time to our CEO: if hiring is really a huge problem we want to focus on, how did we get all these great people? Hm.

The real problem is organizational. Stop worrying so much about hiring, optimize your process and be done with it, and focus on what happens afterward instead.
Because she is a girl or because she is 12 years old?
>A smart person can last many months in a dev role before anyone realizes they're ineffective.

How? If the person is not delivering stories it's pretty obvious. I've seen a few people get the boot after three weeks.
It strikes me that in the same day (albeit one filled with hiring articles) we get an article about the success of Greyston Bakery, which will literally hire anyone and train and support them as much as needed to be successful—and this, which is along similar lines but is about software development, which, obviously, requires special individual aptitude that only a chosen few can succeed at, and must be protected from the pretenders to the throne. /s

Somehow, it feels warm and fuzzy to support the social justice of the little bakery that could, but when it comes to our own companies, our true colors shine.

Continue to take the systematic approach. It is still the best way. Of course, of course you should hire as effectively as possible, and try to have a baseline of aptitude, but there are always going to be outliers and bad fits. It's far more effective to optimize your system for the success of all employees than to focus on weeding out the 'bad ones.' Sure, there will be people that won't fit your system, but they made it through the hiring process for some reason—figure out their true aptitude and transfer them to something they'll be effective at.

The article may be wrong about the existence of fakes and bad programmers—anyone who has filed through a stack of resumes knows that—but it's right on the unreasonableness of the fear and the weight we give it.

I say it all the time to our CEO: if hiring is really a huge problem we want to focus on, how did we get all these great people? Hm.

And if hiring is really the solution to all our problems, then, well, what do we do with all these idiots standing around here?

Ha. That really is the question. The real problem is organizational and systematic. Stop worrying so much about hiring, optimize your process and be done with it, and focus on what happens afterward instead.
Servo is that project, when it's beta I'll go back to Mozilla as I feel like I'm ushering in the Stallman dystopia by supporting proprietary software. I dumped FF when they almost cloned Chrome's UI. If I'm going to use the same UI might as well apt-get install browser-chromium and get a sandbox with it.
Everything ended well for the author, which is great. Especially considering the risk he took by answering their questions without his own attorney present.

If anyone ever finds themselves in a similar position, please:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Don't Talk To Police.

He mentions: "[2] My father-in-law opined that they were trying to agitate me to the point of losing my cool and going postal." That deserves more than a footnote.
I'd be over-the-moon thrilled to interview at a company that does this. Any recommendations for this front-end dev in California?
I agree. It is somewhat misleading to represent yourself as a "Professor" when you are an adjunct, non-tenure track instructor/faculty member.

In response to the earlier question which you also answered:

In general, in American Universities it goes Assistant Professor --> Associate Professor --> Professor at ~5-10 years between each step (the exact details vary depending upon discipline and University). In science, these are usually the people who are writing grants and are at the heads of labs. Usually you must be tenure-track to advise graduate students.

Then there may be another class of 'lecturers' who are not-tenure track but are still considered faculty-members. There is not always a distinction here between lecturers and adjunct instructors, however. Lecturers' main role is usually instruction of undergraduate or graduate students.

Finally, there are the adjunct instructors, whose primary role is the education of undergraduates and who are paid much smaller amounts of money for their work relative to tenure-track faculty. This is a relatively newer class of University employee, and it is definitely a very difficult career. I imagine most adjuncts either have other careers or are attempting to break into the tenure-track rank, although I do no know how often this happens.

In addition, in science there might be 'Research Scientists,' 'Research professors," or 'Staff Scientists' who work under a tenure-track faculty member. They are often somewhat equivalent to lecturers, except they do not instruct undergraduates but instead are usually full devoted to research. It's essentially a "Super-Post Doc," but hopefully with a salary one can reasonably live on modestly.

And for completeness: In science, people do Post-Docs following the completion of their PhD. They are non-faculty jobs under a tenure-track professor where one conducts full-time research, usually for 2-3 years, although some people must complete multiple Post-Docs. The usually idea is to find a faculty job after your post-doc, but I think a majority of people end up filling some ancillary position in science or leaving science entirely, because there are unfortunately many more post-docs than there are faculty positions.

It gets even more complicated when you add in MDs and hospitals to this academic situation.