skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> his software follows the Unix way more faithfully than most Unix server software: collections of small programs that communicate over well defined interfaces.

In my worldview, that's only part of the unix way. The other part is putting the files in well known and agreed upon locations, like /usr and /usr/local and /etc. DJB software breaks these conventions.

Everything else you said is spot on.
To me, recruiting is two problems: outreach and qualification. You're asking about outreach. How we did outreach is a whole 'nother blog post, and one I'm bound to write soon.

What surprised me about recruiting was how much more important qualification is than outreach. Without good qualification, it almost doesn't matter how good your outreach is, because you're filtering for the same highly visible easily accessible candidates every other firm is looking for. The best-priced talent is buried. What you need is ground-penetrating radar. Clever outreach schemes helped us, but what really let us make our best hires was a qualification process that allowed us to confidently ignore resumes.

We didn't just maintain our team's level of quality by ignoring resumes. We transcended it. We never could have run a resume-based process that would hire people who could use lattice math to break crypto. To hire those people, we needed to select for aptitude, not experience.

I haven't said it anywhere yet, but in case the subtext isn't clear: the person who can implement an attack for which edit/compile/debug takes 4-6 hours also does a pretty great job on every other facet of the software security job. There are aptitudes that are very good proxies for other aptitudes!
Did Dog-Human Alliance Drive Out the Neanderthals?
Other posters point out that polygraphs have large error rates and that even the thought that they can 'read you mind' acts as a deterrent. In general, reading one's own mind is somewhat difficult given a stressful situation, let alone reading another's.

Yes, you can do heart rate stuff, but many medications affect that tremendously, you can do temperature stuff via IR video, but that is also super error prone. Just running to grab your flight, a perfectly reasonable thing to do at an airport, would trip every alarm in the building. Your gait would be off, your temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, eye dilation.

The issue is that humans come in an incredible array and variety of conditions. Even if you could take a baseline for every person that would ever want to fly before they got to the airport in a sterile room, the data would be useless by flight #10. This is leaving aside the tremendous human rights issues, engineering, and cost factors.

That said, computers are getting better and better at this every day, so the feasibility is there, it is just that you have to do tracking on an unheard of scale and on a day to day running basis across every single person on the planet. The disease and medical applications are the way to get it 'passed' (whatever governing body that may be), not the TSA.
I wasn't aware of that, and you're right, that is probably more useful than split view. So I stand corrected on that one point, but dang if it didn't take him a long time to come around.
The Challenges of Building the Next-Gen Machine Learning Platform
They can't actually charge him... he's only breached local bylaw which is not enforced by police.
It's not illegal, though it may be copyright infringement. But it also may not be; the fact that something is licenced under CC-NC doesn't preclude it being licensed under other terms too.

The author is a frequent and vociferous critic of commercial publishing. I think we'd all like to see more open science, but I'm concerned that this sort of shallow and poorly-researched accusation is doing the cause more harm than good.
cmd also works.
Thanks! Always in need of inspiration. Which attempts are you referring to specifically?
> It's not illegal, though it may be copyright infringement.

Copyright infringement is illegal, so that sentence is self-contradictory.
The Regulars
Server hosting companies like OVH maintain their own lines or earmarked-guaranteed bandwidth shared-lines (I imagine the intercontinental ones) between their data centers. It may not be practical for hospitals and other real time needs based organizations to maintain their own physical limes, but isn't this the point where such an organization directly makes a business contract with a near backbone provider like level3?

If you need guarantees, I really doubt civilian or home consumer ISPs will fill the need.

If congestion is a problem so packets are unfavorably delayed or dropped, shouldn't that mean those which need greater guarantees provision their communication assets accordingly?

Traders in Chicago and New York are coming up with their own solutions, be it more direct and dedicated fiber optic lines or even direct to direct chained microwave line-of-sight towers. Net neutrality or not, they need greater guarantees than offered to home consumers or small businesses, and I doubt most ISPs can provide such guarantees with our infrastructure.
Intuitively, the reason why it balances out is that while earlier items are more likely to be picked, they're also more likely to get kicked out after being picked.
This is what I got on my phone.

"SORRY

WOLFESTIEN 1-D REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING:

FLASH PLAYER 10

286 COMPUTER

528K OF CONVENTIONAL MEMORY

3 MEG OF HARD DRIVE SPACE

SOUNDBLASTER PRO RECOMMENDED"
I recently switched a forum that I run completely to HTTPS when my users started complaining. Broken proxies at their ISP were breaking the forum for them. Who knows what other kinds of meddling is going on...
It seems to boil down to having to trust your employer to be honest to their word (and implications) about stock options and what their value really is. Even in the most trusted of environments, I still would not fully trust what comes out of the mouth of the person I'm interviewing with since they cannot speak on behalf of any outside investors, (other) founders, or anyone else with a stake in the company.

Given the nature of 99.9% of employer/employee relations, especially in salary negotiation, I would never personally place any value in stock options of any sort. There is simply no verifiable way to calculate what they are worth with a million different ways for them to become worthless and no accountability for a company to be entirely forthcoming.
My strategy for interacting with people at conferences is to not talk about my products until they ask.

This keeps my prospects list full of only truly interested people and lets me not waste time on false leads.

I do recommend getting a booth, but as long as you are low-key you can get a lot of business done just walking around.

Whether the person has a booth or they are just hanging out at an afterparty, we are there for one reason, which is to find business partners, customers, or jobs.

My product happens to be ideal for booth staff, so I do pitch them at their booths and at networking parties away from booths, but only if they ask to hear the pitch. I am not at all obnoxious about it.

Me: "Hi, I am Leon, please tell me your story"
Them: either tell me their pitch or "Sure, but what do you do?"

If they don't pitch me, I say
Me: "I do many things, but I am more interested in learning more about your product because I talk with many people and recommend many products."

This is where many people do it wrong. If you launch into a pitch the first time they ask you what you do without learning more about them that will likely result in a very weak relationship and add noise into your system.

Them: "We do ..."
Them: "So what do you do?"

If they don't ask, then I simply end the conversation and walk away.

Me: "It's a product for tradeshow exhibitors like you that helps you get your first 1000 customers"
Them: Either a variation of "how do you do that?" or an expression of disinterest.

If they are not interested, I simply end the conversation and walk away. Sometimes, I break that rule, but only where it makes sense and it is obvious that the person is likely to be very interested. Talking to people who are not engaged with you is a great way to hear "Sorry, we are not interested" when you follow up in the future.

Me: "I'll show you [go through a quick demo using my own data]"
Them: either ask me for my card or ask to try with their information (about as strong an indicator as it gets) or express disinterest.

If they don't ask to try my product with their own information, I end the conversation and walk away.

As a result of this strategy, I have 826 highly interested people on my pre-launch list. I also haven't upset anyone because I terminated those conversations without ever pitching the person.

===

There are other things you can do to be more productive at conferences

That attendee to attendee conference networking app that is almost never used for anything except looking at schedules is a good way to create your target list of people you may want to approach. My app actually supports true 1:1 marketing if you wanted to invest that much time into it, but that is usually not necessary.

The key to wasting less time is to terminate unproductive conversations early. It's a flow chart. :) Keep your phone charged and carry external batteries. Have an offline demo available and assume you will not have Internet connectivity.
Have you compared w3m to "links" (links2 on Debian/Ubuntu)? links is my preferred TTY browser, but it seems to be neglected by most users.
On the other hand, you're likely to be taking a sample of rows that match a query. It's unlikely that the database already keeps track of the count of how many rows will match an arbitrary query, unless you set it up in advance. So you'd need to load the row ids of the matching rows, then sample from them.

A sufficiently smart database might understand "order by rand() limit n" and do reservoir sampling on row id's behind the scenes. I wouldn't count on it, though.

If you set it up in advance, you could also use reservoir sampling to avoid even storing all the data in the first place, while still saving a random sample.
Any hard examples of actual cures found (or existing medicines independently derived) ?
I've just started writing a book on GitHub that intends to offer a bunch of systematic, practical approaches to anxiety, depression, and other mental disorders, as well as a sort of "general take" on how to skillfully live as a human being (under a variety of circumstances). I've literally just started throwing the notes together, but if you're curious to see it evolve from step 1, it's here: https://github.com/brynbellomy/datwantendo

EDIT: so far, it draws from Aikido, Dialectical Behavior Therapy, the psychology of video games and virtual experiences — new additions will continue to be as diverse in origin (hopefully).
Worth remembering that for the most time in human history, no one was ever "fired" in the sense that happens today. You worked on a farm all your life, or possibly would have a trade, and that was that. So it's a new concept and we haven't fully come to terms with that.

If the economic system keeps requiring people to switch jobs, then society must be more accepting: Employers need to be less weird about it, employees less devastated when it happens, everything smoothened out by a few weeks or months of unemployment benefits if necessary.
What Is Polis? The Anatomy of the Idea and the Journey That Lies Ahead
An agent will help you: find the opportunities that are actually interesting to you, get the info from recruiters you really want (like compensation) upfront while keeping you anonymous, and help you negotiate salary.
I mean yeah, he probably fired himself too!
Sorry, that wasn't a clear sentence. I should have said "It's not [necessarily] illegal [to sell a work licensed CC-NC]"
ARM Clusters Pushing into Supercomputing
When I first read replaced, I was thinking Sculley not Cook. Clearly one has been more successful so far than the other :)
BioFabric layouts are just a linear ordering of the nodes and edges, and you can specify those with input files. For example, you can break out clusters and show intra- and inter- cluster links separately. See http://www.biofabric.org/gallery/index.html#LesMiz
The amount of non-technical things that I learned from Zach is a very long list.

In my opinion, GitHub was, by Zach's description at least, the "exactly right" sort of organization that I would imagine an employee wanting to work at.

I blatantly stole his PowerPoint tips, right down to the orange-colored Yanone Kaffesatz font.

I learned about how to to unsuck the development environment, that the product was the byproduct, and more about Github than from probably any other source.

This doesn't change that for me, but he was indeed a fantastic ambassador and representative of a company that I would very much love to work for.

This doesn't make me think negatively of Github, or Zach, but without knowing why he was fired, or for what reasons he's no longer a good fit, it does give me the idea that the big tent has shrunk a little bit.
Good to know. I'm not a lawyer either. I'm just drawing from experience with companies in the Boston area. Maybe my info is just out of date or maybe it's regional. But usually your two options, in my experience, are don't sign the agreement and received no severance, or sign it without modification and soften the blow with the cash. Granted I've never seen anyone try to negotiate at that point -- most just sign the paper and leave.
If they explicitly say they will stop in the release version, I would accept that argument. If not...
Silence, and specifically unnecessary "chatter" is also a major tenet of the Benedictine rule. Some monasteries follow it more strictly than others. (I believe the Trappist and Carthusians in particular are "reforms" of Benedictine practice.)

The documentary was "Into Great Silence" by Philip Groning. For those of us who live "in the world" it can be a challenge to watch because it moves at a really glacial scale, but ultimately, I think, it's very rewarding to see that life doesn't have to be led with so much hustle and bustle.

Monks tend to live by a completely different sense of time than the rest of us. It's been said that they don't think in terms of years, but centuries. I've managed the site for a Benedictine monastery for almost 20 years, and I've long since learned that even the smallest things are very, very carefully considered. For example, it took them nearly two years from the time I proposed it to okay an email list for their publications. This is something that would have been a 24 hour decision for a "business." However, dealing with them and getting to know several of the monks pretty well (in person and via email), they've taught me that sometimes slowing down is definitely a good thing.
Please don't comment about downvotes or bait other users into downvoting you. Those are rules of the site:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Nice! Glad to see more work done with CMU Sphinx (and I'd be equally excited if this was done with Julius) -- so many possibilities!

I assume this will be useful to data scientists who want to process lyrics? what other intended/near-at-hand use cases are there?
I'm not sure the conclusion here is that remote tests are bad. It's also possible that your screening methods didn't do a good enough job. (As a disclaimer, I'm a terrible interviewer, but...) I believe that by the time a candidate gets into a room with me, that my team and I should have a good idea about whether this person will work out or not. If I make them take time out of their day, and I take time out of my day, and then 10 minutes into it I realize they don't know what they're talking about, I see that as my screw-up. I shouldn't have let them get this far. You know what I mean?

Right now at my job, we don't do a good enough job of this. I get candidates that walk through the door that can't code more than "Hello World!" without screwing up. I'm not happy about that.

This post, I think, enumerates a large number of things that you can do to determine worthiness before they even walk through the door -- the remote test is only a small part of it. If all you're doing is a remote test, then maybe you need to do more, yes?
When answering questions in a YC interview you really need to satisfy the top 3 YC criteria for startup success.

1-Make something (a large enough number of) people want.

What YC wants to hear in the interview:
who are these people?(show us you made an effort to find them)
do they need what you are building?(show us you made an effort to find out)
what are they doing now to get what they need?(show us you made an effort to find out)
how is your solution much much better at helping them?(showing us who is begging you for your solution)

2-Make something that a small number of people absolutely love. (as apposed to something that a large number of people merely like)

What YC wants to hear in the interview:
-Show us a small set of users that would absolutely love to use your solution.(i.e. who would get upset if you stopped building your solution)

3-Teams (and execution) matter more than ideas

What YC wants to hear in the interview:
-Less focus on the technical merits of your idea/product and more focus on how you are getting users and the market you are targeting. If you did not give the right answers to items 1 and 2 above then clearly you are not the right team according to YC.(Note: If the product is highly technical you do need to show that you have a technical founder with the right skills. But that is not really the same thing as focusing on the technical details of the product)
MeetBSD CA: Performance Analysis of BSD
if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
Just wanted to let you know that I really enjoyed reading your article and will probably crib shamelessly from it in the future☺

I will second the value of a work sample. It's so simple that it feels incredible that we didn't do them in the past. What my team __hasn't_ is issue the exact same work-sample problem; you make a compelling argument for doing that, so I think that we'll implement it.
There are a lot of 'hiring is broken' posts and this is a decent one, but I don't think I'm alone in feeling that none of them convincingly identify the problem, let alone solve it.[1] So I'll do that here.

Hiring isn't broken because people use the wrong interview questions. It's broken because firms are engaging in a zero-sum battle for talent. But if what you're doing is worth a damn, it should be worth a damn when ordinary people do it. If what distinguishes your company is that you've managed to hire smarter people, maybe your company isn't so great.[2][3]

The proper hiring criterion is pretty simple: do the people who will be working with the candidate like her? In Blink, Gladwell presented good evidence that formal interview process isn't any more objective than this. And when you think about it, what would "objective" even mean?

There's also an issue with the labor market -- in particular, the difficulty of firing. You're much better off hiring liberally and firing candidates that don't work out. If all firms did this, the labor market would be more efficient and firing wouldn't be so bad.

Apple is a good example. Their profit per employee is second only to Netflix among large tech companies, and this includes a significant fraction of retail personnel. Apple's profit per engineer is probably higher than Netflix's, and that's remarkable considering they're over twenty times bigger.

Does Apple achieve this with some optimized interview format? Higher salaries? Onsite massage? No, they do it with better products (and a command and control governance model...).

It means that the software industry isn't nearly as innovative as it thinks it is. This is actually so obvious it's the subject of popular jokes ('like airbnb for pet food' etc). It's also obvious when you consider the ratio of effort spent building tools to products. All the latest frameworks but... Where are the apps? Where are the apps that are even half as feature-rich as a typical Windows application from the '90s? Google Plus still can't keep which things I've +1'd straight.

[1] It reminds me of the situation with essays claiming to explain why privacy is important even if you 'have nothing to hide'. See https://gist.github.com/clumma/414f0c9a8fedf9ba9db5

[2] https://twitter.com/clumma/status/139082596587012096

[3] Or worse, that you've managed to deprive your competition of smart people. Google has done this -- hired people without having work for them to do, on the reasoning that something might come up and at least they won't be working for the competition.
Don't forget his second absence:

https://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&...
Uber suspends service in Seoul after months-long row with officials
EmberConf 2015 Keynote, Glimmer rendering engine announced
Thanks for answering questions! I'd be curious to know where you got your (presumably massive) data from to train a NN to spit out what seems to be binding affinity between two candidates (drug and target). Do you guys use a NN for each target? I know you may not be able to answer these questions :)

I hope your team succeeds, keep up the hard work!
Why everything breaks at 25 employees
I'm just one guy that Zach really inspired. Thanks for that talk you gave on Github. It really inspired me and made me bring what's great in Github into my work and everyday life. I really liked the part of the talk on remote teams.
Maybe you're fed up, maybe you want to be by yourself...who knows. So you look down and see a tortoise. It's crawling toward you...

You reach down and flip the tortoise over on its back, Leon.

The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over. But it can't. Not with out your help. But you're not helping.

I mean you're not helping! Why is that, Leon?
Software testing is a loser's bet
IMO Fire fast is a mistake, even from a purely green-eye shades perspective. It takes time to bring a new employee up to speed, and while they're coming up to speed they need attention from other people who are supposed to be working on their own projects.

Beyond that it creates a morale problem. People who work together form social attachments and get upset when a coworker disappears. People who are in no actual danger of being fired will assume they're next. People who make mistakes or miss deadlines will start looking for new jobs because job-hunting is easier when you have a job. And good people will start to leave because it's just not a fun place to work with the black cloud hanging over the office.

That is not to say you should never fire someone. Sometimes it's unavoidable. But it's not something you should do lightly.
G+ also beats FB for memory consumption by a mile.
Font that replaces every buzzword by a Comic Sans-styled censorship bar
Making Brian Williams cover rap songs?
Show HN: A ridiculously simple personal wiki
These two Career Tools podcasts cover several aspects of getting fired, including a very good answer to your question:

https://www.manager-tools.com/2011/03/getting-fired-part-1
https://www.manager-tools.com/2011/03/getting-fired-part-2
The Dow is price-weighted because it was started before computers. Add 30 prices and divide by adjustment factor is the easiest to calculate. Also, it was the first index, before people realized other methods are more accurate.

Now it has to stay that way for backward compatibility.
In this scenario, is gamma a single server making requests of Beta under a single authorization?

Or is it a stand in for multiple remote resource consumers with potentially different things happening under different authorizations/identities which may require Alpha to say, "You there, Gamma_3 running a job for Mr. Manager, you are allowed to eat those Beta cookies, here's your voucher!"
versus
"Hey, Gamma_5 running a job for Ms. Accountant, you are not allowed to have cookies, did you want this spreadsheet Beta has?"