skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The with-x style macros can indeed be replaced by functions that take a closure. E.g. in Scheme you have the function (call-with-input-file string proc).

The macro is slightly more concise. Contrast

(with-input-file (x "x") (print (read x))) ; Common Lisp

with

(call-with-input-file "x" (lambda (x) (print (read x)))) ; Scheme
Fibres and cellular structures preserved in 75M-year-old dinosaur specimens
Discover insights in your quantified lifestyle with Sherbit
I only compared Go with Java.
nginx is written in C though - I know it's possible to do coroutine-type stuff with setjmp/longjmp, but isn't that considered risky?
Yeah... no.

Sorry, but please read what I wrote again. "An extremely small number of people under the proper set of circumstances may potentially benefit from income contingent plans, and then be forgiven after 25 years", is simply not a rational response.
Such mischaracterization is a giant red flag for knowing you're dealing with groupthink. Moldbug's points venture into forbidden thoughts and attack the national religion, so the knee jerk reaction is to regroup at ad-hominem by ascribing simplistic straw men.

FWIW, reading "A Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations" made me identify as liberal. I wholeheartedly agree with Moldbug's analysis of the arrow of time and condemnation of the machine(s) of USG and the Cathedral. But I believe he unjustly discounts the idea of distributed force wherein aggression is unproductive, and IMHO making that work at lower levels is a better goal than the federated centralization of take-it-or-leave-it fiefdoms. (Then again, this growing feel-good "SJW" cancer has me rethinking how enlightened such a society could be, but I digress...). He also discounts how technology has made subjects ever-more transparent to their rulers, with a simple handwave that rulers wouldn't be interested in unnecessary policing. (If I am guilty of oversimplifying here I apologize - it's been a while since I read him and I'm recalling my main takeaways.)

I don't believe in Urbit for similar reasoning - it seems like its entities are opaque objects where the only primitive is composition, and punts to delegation for solving the hard problems. I'd previously gone down a similar "immutable universal code" fugue with r6rs as the basis and eventually considered it a dead end.
The person you're replying to wasn't trying to say you meant to invest on margin but that what you are doing is the same as investing on margin.

When you do margin trading you take on debt to allow you to buy more stock. In your case, you aren't actually "taking on" debt technically, but you choose not to pay it off so that you can buy more stock.

After all, the scenarios break down to debt + more stocks or no debt + less stocks.

Obviously there are some differences, but I hope that explanation of the analogy made sense. The point is, by investing money instead of using it to pay off debt you are increasing your risk and reward whereas when you pay off debt you decrease it.
This is maybe the 5th or 6th GenX vs Boomers vs Millenials, entitlement/economy/future/past/politics thread that I've seen today.

It's a little weird how the same story is being pushed by several publishers on the same date by different authors. It's almost as if they are trying to form a media narrative or something. But I can't see the bigger picture to see what purpose this would serve.

On a side note:

Does it make me a GenX'er if I'm fed up with the widespread problem of stereotyping an entire generation? If I'm not fitting the stereotype is there something wrong with me? Should I be worrying if I don't fit in with my generation? Oh god, I should be shouldn't I? ;)
Why? Is it harder to dehumanize people when you see their mundane side?

The fact that a horrible, unconscionable, genocidal dictator was also a painter makes his paintings more interesting, if anything.
> "great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people"

My favorite part of the quote is that it's talking about people.
Can you confirm that actually inverting a BT or solving other similarly probs would have been part of his future job at Google?

If so, they were consistent in disqualifying him in spite of his awesome track record, fame or "street cred" but if not, I can't really justify or defend this type of ceremonial or bureaucratic gotcha interview questions as they are just useless and can be abused by the interviewer to reject applicants they dislike for any reason or whim they might have at that moment.
I interviewed @ google several years ago as part of some due-diligence they were doing to decide if they wanted to acquire the startup I was working at, [redacted].

It was several hours, with many interviewers one at a time, of academic exercises. Some I could see were relevant to some of Google's projects, but that wasn't the emphasis- it was very much a "how much do you remember from CS courses?" (with a few exceptions- one had me explain why a snippet of C would crash- something more what I would expect a senior engineer to know that was more practical-oriented).

I _think_ I did pretty well (again, it was part of a bigger due-diligence-- another story altogether, so I never heard), but in the end I was struck by the fact that (a) not a single interviewer had looked at or asked about any of my publicly available work, and (b) not a single one even asked something along the lines of "what are your strengths / what do you think your contribution would be" (or weaknesses, for that matter, but that seems less important).

Of course, one of the other guys I worked with lucked out and got interviewed by one of the paypal-mafia, and ended up with a reportedly very stimulating hour long discussion about actual work, strengths, and actual situations that one would hypothetically need to handle at google.
This is a dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9692635
> enough to invalidate your point.

It might except ex-googlers in this thread of stated Google "banned" use of Homebrew internally. So the net benefit to the company and/or employees remains small to zero.

This is off topic though, since he was not being interviewed for homebrew development.
Don't know why this is downvoted, it's absolutely true and one major symptom of the problems with Brazilian football today.

Except for Santos clinging on to Neymar for a couple years after his talent was widely known, I can't think of many great players who spent a significant amount of time in Brazil at their peak.
Fine point.
Totally irrelevant. Most of the 'private' CCTV cameras are in fact hooked into the monitoring infrastructure of 2 or 3 big security companies, making access much easier for the government.
On the article:

> “This is a standard solution deployed by telcos globally to help their customers keep track of their data usage in terms of mega bytes used. It is therefore meant to improve customer experience and empower them to manage their usage. One of our network vendor partners has piloted this solution through a third party to help customers understand their data consumption in terms of volume of data used.”

The same thing was claimed about various malware in the past, which was found capable of doing all kind of weird things way beyond "improving customer experience".
Python free security course
Firstly, you're not entitled to any job you want just because you wrote Homebrew. If you accepted an interview with Google, then you accepted the fact that Google will judge you based on your problem solving skills, just like every other person was asked.

Secondly, I don't think this is a hard interview question; it's certainly fair.
Did you expect to be asked knowledge-based questions that Google knows you're already good at? Questions specifically geared towards you?
Or questions where Google can watch you solve a problem and be comfortable with the fact that you are able to solve coding problems?
Did you think Google would hire you to write Homebrew? Or solve problems on teams Google has?

I think this person is just being unreasonable.
I thought of eco-terrorism too. But then I thought of William Ayers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers
Wow, I saw this from the air recently and had no idea what it was. I forgot to look it up until it popped up here; thanks!
>you answered a question with "I'd Google it" what the reaction would be //

"We don't look kindly on trademark genericization."??
The point about interviewer vs. interviewee familiarity with the problem is important. It's hard to avoid comparing the interviewee's off-the-cuff solution to one that was researched at leisure and refined over multiple previous interviews. Really damn hard. Psychologists and teachers are trained in avoiding that kind of bias, and still struggle. Very few engineers are equipped to see through the "fog" and interpret a candidate's performance in a useful way. I've only encountered one - a recently former CS prof - and I've been in the business a long time.
You're right, I didn't write it exactly enough. What gets smaller is (y + expected interest on y) because the expected interest goes to 0.

The whole thing to realize here is that the 'cost' is not an actual loss as in 'less money comes in'; it's a cost in the sense of 'this portfolio will perform less than we anticipated'. And if the interest that people pay is based on a certain overall performance, but now all of a sudden the performance needs to be adjusted downwards, then one might argue 'we were shooting for a 0-operation, but in the end we will have to spend money to make up for the good borrowers leaving'.

Here's another intuition that explains it: if the market is willing to finance the good borrowers at half the rate it takes to lend to everybody, regardless of their prospects of paying back; then only the bad borrowers will stay in the government-funded portfolio, reducing the performance that was originally estimated. Which is, if you've accounted for future earnings based on the original estimate, a loss when you have to write it down.
Why do you think white boarding over the course of an several hours would be a better predictor of these traits than years of making very meaningful contributions to software?

It seems to me like creating and managing a repository of more than 4800 contributors is a much better signal of a candidates software engineering, communication, and human skills than a couple of people's opinion of a couple of hours of white boarding.
> Inviting Moldbug bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who constantly argue against any kind of modern society.

Imagine if your sentence was reformulated like this instead.

> Inviting Harvey Milk bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who [insert claim here] against any kind of modern society.

See the problem? :(

Tolerance is hard, I know, but something we need to foster nonetheless.

Even if we don't allow these people to conferences, we still share roads, grocery stores, national identity, tax revenues, employment opportunities, classrooms, etc, with them. Humanity sucks badly enough at cooperation already! Let's not ever actively discourage it!
Well, for what it's worth, it's all we have to go on at the moment.

And in either case, my original comment was directed at the idea that "algorithmic interviews provide false negatives, but not false positives".
This whole concept of paying attention to fellow techies' political views is weird to me. The concept of caring about them to this degree is even weirder.

Politics is a common topic here, of course. I've participated in my share of such discussions. But I couldn't tell you who took what position. I'd definitely never look at a prospective conference speaker and say, oh, that's the guy who believes X, where X is any political subject. Not even as a neutral observation, let alone as criticism.

Is this a real thing? This conversation feels like a window into an alternate universe.
"We really hate the blind." - Lapham's Quarterly

flagged
Doesn't make short variable names right. How do long variable names obscure code!! That's insane. There are many, many ways to obscure code, and there many ways to make it clear. Long-names is one of them.
>> You're given weeks to refresh your knowledge ahead of a Google interview

Begs the question, doesn't it?

>> Binary trees are MOST ASSUREDLY on that list

Sure they are... and my intro to CS textbook was ~500 pages. I'll bet I could find something to trip up just about anybody, especially when coupled with the pressure of doing it in front of the class ^H^H^H people that have $$$$/power over you.
Yeah, the mask really doesn't have very far to slip.
That's not actually true. A large amount of those CCTV cameras are in fact managed and monitored by 2 or 3 big security companies, making them much more accessible to the government.
May be it's a good thing for the news/media industry. Why rely on flimsy ads. If your news contents are credible and important to users they'll subscribe to it a la Netflix or HBO Go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP0wSvw_qKk Here ya go!
That's a great idea; just posted it over there and added it to the sidebar.
inverting a binary tree is a pretty basic question though, if you understand recursion. i can understand why google would ask simple algo questions
> Presumption of innocence doesn't prevent you from having to go to court and defend yourself.

That's right, but you have to defend against what they should prove to the court. But @rosser is claiming that it's not even applicable in the civil law. That's really surprising to me (IANAL just to be clear), so I want to understand why.
Of course at the time it was necessary for modern architecture to use new/different construction techniques. Although now the former is loved and the latter is loathed for leaking and sagging at the time you basically couldnt have one without the other.

Its like someone today complaining that ruby on rails (or whatever popular software you like really) was monolithic and buggy when first written. Sure - but that misses the entire achievement of it. Its impossible to do something so radically new perfect for all future needs the first time.
There are tens of thousands of employees at Google. Most of them interview. People are different.
If you can make a convincing case at the whiteboard, maybe Google will hire you!
If a prediction engine can consistently predict your next line of code, wouldn't that be a sign that you're doing way too much copying and pasting instead of abstracting common patterns?
Thanks for the comment.

Currently our "queries per day" limits are an averaged value over the course of the month. This is to allow for scenarios exactly like the one you've mentioned.
We see this use case a lot, inbound lead gen via text is very effective.

We also offer voice on SendHub, so you can get calls on the number too. I believe we're unique in offering both those services on toll free numbers too.
Problem is if your system is actually capable measuring up to the claimed degree of accuracy, or just stabbing in the dark after a certain point.

IQ tests supposedly become inaccurate after 150/160, so you wouldn't really want to put too much emphasis on 180 vs 170 at those levels.
No, a psychopath would've done something out of revenge.

I was doing something to remind an engineer that the physical world is of paramount importance.

A bit of bleeding and embarassment in 2010 as a reminder that things that are there, are indeed there, is better than being pulped by heavy machinery that "shouldn't be there" but is anyway in 2018.
I don't doubt that it saves you money in the long run, but my point is if you're planning on not working and not making real money for a very long time you're better off with the mortgage and a LOT more cash laying around.
[Hi kayamon, I am presuming you're Richard, if I'm mistaken in that please let me know.]

Collected together for one response ...

> On a machine where programs are supplied as bytecode,
> there are indeed two disjoint regions.
> The bytecode sits in it's own region. You can't
> touch it from the data region.

Doesn't that depend on how you define the byte code? If I define byte codes as follows,

0x01 0xnn 0xmm load a byte from offset 0xnnmm in memory.
0x02 0xqq load qq into accumulator immediate
0x03 0xnn 0xmm store accumulator into 0xnnmm in memory
0x04 0xnn 0xmm set program counter to 0xnnmm
0x05 increment accumulator

Then I put

02 00 05 03 00 01 04 00 00

Into memory, and "run" my byte code, This program self modifies the load immediate value continuously.

When Java defined its byte code it went out of its way to avoid 'pointer arithmetic' to make the language safer but even in Java's heap model the memory to store data and executable content is the same memory, it is an artifact of the Java byte code definition that it doesn't allow for self modifying Java code, it has nothing to say about byte code in general. And the point where things get confusing for me is that architecture is reasoning about structure in general, where as implementation is reasoning about structure in specifics. So there is nothing architecturally significant about byte codes with respect to computer architecture, other than you can simulate a variety of architectural choices by how you define your byte codes.

> So every program needs to be wrapped in an
> additional VM?

No. The point was that your blog post conflated computer architecture with an implementation choice made by a particular vendor. Many vendors have chosen to create implementations which make implementing self modifying code difficult. They have their reasons, and you elucidated on two of them, rights management and security.

That they have done so, gives them some benefit, and it comes at some cost to you, the developer.

When looked at from a cost / benefit point of view, I would be interested to read about how those design choices constrain your ability to deliver a compelling game experience, or a needed capability. To often these things are only discussed in terms of what they do for party A or party B and rarely do we get some thinking on what we cannot have because of the constraints imposed by their implementation choice.
Well that's a...niche market.
Max should add code in Homebrew to check if hostname contains "corp.google.com", and exit with a message that Homebrew can't run inside Google.

Petty, but fuck em. They don't want him, they shouldn't get the fruit of his work.
> But you do when you're 1-3 feet away

It's not like a regular screen that's 1-2 feet away, where you're reading 9-12 point fonts all day. This is a collaborative table, that's going to have multiple people standing around it. Sizes of things will be bigger so people can read them from further away, upside down, etc.
Not really. The course can be free, but the certification paid. If every year 1% of the user base pays $50 to $100 for certification, that is worth $50M to $100M in revenue. I know there was a time I would pay $100 to get an English certification (before coming to the US for school). I also "help" teach French in college and privately. If they required a certification, I would not have minded paying $200 at that time to get a certificate.
Background: I worked at Google for 5 years and did a bunch of interviewing for them.

I don't support skipping interviews even for good candidates, but if you were going to it would work the other way around -- you'd value recent accomplishments over more distant ones.

People don't understand that cutting out folks who had their name attached to some big successes but can't solve a toy problem in an interview is usually a really good thing. It's a strength of the system more often than a weakness. You wouldn't believe the number of senior candidates I interviewed who had really impressive resumes but were clearly checked out from doing real technical work -- folks who obviously no longer lived close to the code and either were very rusty or just no longer had the temperament to spend time thinking through a slightly tricky piece of code.

One of the reasons not to skip an interview for a candidate you're confident is good is that a good interview can be a great sales pitch to come work for your company.
Yeah. If you get this stuff on a new boat or barge, you have to basically send around guys with voltmeters with really long leads, all over the ship... if I was in charge of the bridge I'd do that. It's relatively inexpensive, and either finds the problem or gets rid of one common variable.
Thanks for the answer, where can we submit our suggestions for examples/tutorials?

I mean having an example project that runs some Python/R/C# code against historical stock market data would be a good use case.
Cool, thanks! Looks like a nice reference.
This is extraordinary news. There has been an overwhelming shift from web to mobile advertising in the last few years and the prediction is for this to increase significantly. For the largest traffic producer to allow the blocking of ads is going to completely upend the economics of many web sites. I think it is very telling that Apple is doing this right when they have announced a News app. Clearly they want to direct publishers and bloggers into that app and away from mobile sites.

All in all this could be devastating for companies like Google.
That honestly looks like keyboard smashing. I love it.
None of these things even matter.

He made billions by building companies of value, selling them for millions, and then using that credibility to get private (and government) investors in his billion dollar ventures.

At this point, he could have an all cotton candy diet and it would make this list, yet have no bearing on his status.
http://climateinternational.org has a set of visualizations for daily maximum temperature created from this dataset. Hopefully more visualizations will be added soon.
Ok, sure. Does it work now?
I get that a lot. Very occasionally, it's after "thanks for saving my life / my job". There's no shame in being an asshole but there is shame and dishonor in being insincere.
I don't think a combo of dns aliasing to the ad network, plus better embedding ads in the dom to make them look like a site's regular content, plus random ordering of news and ads to prevent any kind of static css rules matching can be countered.

Now of course that means ads will require a bit more work to integrate to a website, and probably move integration deeper in the server side, but technicaly i don't see any major issues. Am I missing something ?
Chipotle to Offer Part-Time Workers Paid Vacation, Sick Pay, Tuition
Wrote a blog post about exactly this problem: optimizing interviews for fancy algorithm solving, when the position's daily work is nothing like that:

http://www.developingandstuff.com/2015/05/why-i-dont-do-codi...
This example seems really interesting, we should do it.

Github issues would be a fine place I think.

Or emailing me at jd@pachyderm.io if you'd prefer :)
I have no idea what the job was.

But my point is this is not a bureaucratic gotcha question. If you can't do this task, you don't really know how to program well. Sorry but that's just how it is. It's like failing FizzBuzz.

There is this culture of crappy software that has happened lately, especially in the Web world, and it is really quite lamentable. I believe that a very large positive impact would be made on the world -- due to the extreme prevalence of software these days -- if more people would take seriously the idea of software creation as a craft with a very high skill ceiling, and work diligently to improve their understanding and their skills.
Downvote with no explanation. Someone disagrees that these guys use zero-days? Not to mention some of which include jumping to kernel mode?

2011:
CVE-2011-3402

2014:
CVE-2014-4148
CVE-2014-6324
CVE-2015-2360
What was their wording for "WTF are you waiting for"? This story felt like abuse.