skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I was only interviewing for open position on my own team, it was pretty insane - and I didn't end up putting up with it, it was the thing that finally convinced me to leave Amazon, though there were of course other reasons.

To summarize the situation - we were a pretty scrappy team of 3 engineers that gradually took on more and more work as the scope of our work increased. There was an org-wide hiring freeze put in place because of the general doom-and-gloom right after 2008, so our demands to hire more people to cope with the increasing workload were repeatedly refused.

Come ~2011, the company starts breathing again and finally lifts the hiring freeze, at which point 7 engineering positions suddenly opened on my team, and the 3 of us became nearly full-time interviewers. I was gone within a few months, my other coworker soon after, and the most senior engineer on the team transferred within the company.

I'm not sure what the salient lesson is here - don't try to hire for 7 positions simultaneously with only 3 interviewers? Don't put a hiring freeze in place when there's obviously more work to be done? Something.

There were also lots of problems with the recruitment and hiring process itself:

- the quality of candidates we were getting from HR was very poor. Each of us wasted incredible amounts of time phone screening candidates who were wildly mismatched with the role, or straight up not qualified. Our phone screen fail rate was easily >90%, and this not only was disappointing for the candidates but also kills your interviewers' productivity and morale.

- Amazon has the "bar raiser" system. The standard on-site interview at Amazon was a full-day (6-8 hours) of back-to-back interviews, including lunch. One of these interviewers is a designated "bar raiser", who is usually a more senior, particularly trusted (or just political) person. This person can veto even an entire room full of "yes" decisions - and this happened with some regularity. It is absolutely devastating for team morale when an arbitrarily appointed person - who usually isn't even on your own team - vetoes a candidate that everyone on the team liked. This naturally resulted in us interviewing even more people, and more frustrated because we knew even if the candidate passed with flying colors there's still a chance they'll be caught by the bar-raiser's decimation and arbitrarily be rejected.

That last part is the situation I'm in at my current place - I'm at a smaller company where one of the original high-level engineers insists on interviewing everyone. He's also a fan of gotcha brain teaser problems - so even well-qualified candidates who interview well with the rest of the team will get into a room with him and he'll veto the candidate when they fail his teaser-of-the-day.
I've run into those scenarios before and gone with the small. The large has a net negative impact on you. Honestly, buying soft drinks are net negative regardless, but better a small net negative than a large net negative*.

The look on the cashier's face is interesting - they feel like they are doing a disservice to me if they can't convince me to take the large...
"Even women who would be allowed to have an abortion under the restrictive law, are refused treatment by doctors and hospitals such as the case of the 14 years old raped girl P, who was denied access to safe and legal abortion services due to harassment and intimidation by hospital workers, the police and others."
articles like this give me mixed feelings. Python is one of the best languages to use. GUIs are, in general, one of the worst UI types, clearly inferior to CLIs and web UIs -- in the general case.
Since this guy has no clue, let me clarify as someone who worked at Google until recently:

Any Google employee who spews something like "Google is perfect if you are 20-something, white or Asian, Jewish/blah blah background male..." will be (with high probability) asked by his[1] coworkers WTF he is talking about, and would he please shut up or learn to open his mouth without insulting his coworkers. If the behavior continues, it may or may not result in disciplinary action, though the consensus seemed that there aren't enough disciplinary action. (I guess it depends on who you ask.)

Contrary to popular conception, Google employs a lot of thoughtful people and they want to make their workplace a better place to live and work.

[1] I'd normally say "their", but it seems "his" here is more coherent with my... "observation of reality."
SpyHunter 4 Email and Password 2015 Crack Full Download
ahhh, 18 new ways that random faceless hackers and/or not-exactly-white-hat governments can MITM me. what's not to trust?
Was this story removed? It has more points than several older stories currently visible on the HN front page (and, for that matter, the next 5 pages after that), which, as far as I know [0], means it should be listed on one of those pages. But it's not.

----

[0] http://amix.dk/blog/post/19574
Why does it have to codified?
It's not a very long sentence. What part is confusing?
This makes me think of Feynman's comments on Cargo Cult Science:

"In 1937 a man named Young did a very interesting [experiment]. He had a long corridor with doors all along one side where the rats came in, and doors along the other side where the food was. He wanted to see if he could train the rats to go in at the third door down from wherever he started them off. No. The rats went immediately to the door where the food had been the time before.

The question was, how did the rats know, because the corridor was so beautifully built and so uniform, that this was the same door as before? Obviously there was something about the door that was different from the other doors. So he painted the doors very carefully, arranging the textures on the faces of the doors exactly the same. Still the rats could tell. Then he thought maybe the rats were smelling the food, so he used chemicals to change the smell after each run. Still the rats could tell. Then he realized the rats might be able to tell by seeing the lights and the arrangement in the laboratory like any commonsense person. So he covered the corridor, and still the rats could tell.

He finally found that they could tell by the way the floor sounded when they ran over it. And he could only fix that by putting his corridor in sand. So he covered one after another of all possible clues and finally was able to fool the rats so that they had to learn to go in the third door. If he relaxed any of his conditions, the rats could tell.

Now, from a scientific standpoint, that is an A-number-one experiment. That is the experiment that makes rat-running experiments sensible, because it uncovers that clues that the rat is really using-- not what you think it's using. And that is the experiment that tells exactly what conditions you have to use in order to be careful and control everything in an experiment with rat-running.

I looked up the subsequent history of this research. The next experiment, and the one after that, never referred to Mr. Young. They never used any of his criteria of putting the corridor on sand, or being very careful. They just went right on running the rats in the same old way, and paid no attention to the great discoveries of Mr. Young, and his papers are not referred to, because he didn't discover anything about the rats. In fact, he discovered all the things you have to do to discover something about rats. But not paying attention to experiments like that is a characteristic example of cargo cult science."

http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html
Not if you've ever met a human.
In Australia 10pc is the largest serving of chicken nuggets you can get at McDonalds, with the other sizes being 3 or 6 (I don't know the prices because they're not listed on their website and I don't often go to McDonalds; https://mcdonalds.com.au/menu/chicken-mcnuggets). Could this be the key though, if 10 is the largest here, then that suggests it is more than what most people can really eat. Having 20 at the same price might just be a decoy to make McDonalds look generous as they'll give you 20 for the same price if you really want (but you don't really want). Might be good value to get 20 if you're sharing but then you'd probably be tempted to get drinks for each person with a most certainly high margin.
Autonomous human transport project [video]
It's quite interesting that the ORM comes in first in the question on value. Ahead of routing and views. Once I learnt and used SQLAlchemy, I think the Django ORM is lesser component than the routing/view processing, which I find much of a much-ness in terms of the other major frameworks. That said, in django, batteries are included, and spares, and rechargables, and a charger!
Has anyone gone into a McDonald's to verify this wasn't just a pricing mistake?
It's not, and it's wrong. Probably some 'facts' told by training gurus or whatnot.

You can be 5 feet tall, built on a cat frame and still be dominant. Being dominant is much more about how you interact socially. And no, being the 'tough' guy doesn't help.

You can feel more confidant if you have some more muscle mass, but that's about it.

Now, about the testosterone. Exercise will make your testosterone go up for only a few minutes to an hour, which doesn't do much of a difference. (Same for sex btw; levels go up AFTER sex.)
Besides, if you lack the hormone in any serious matters, you should seek a physician. Other than that, why would you want more? Because you think it's in direct proportion to your manliness?
No, but that does sound like it could be an interesting article.
I would immediately hire you - just based on what I read. Seriously. I hate stereotypes, and not allowing people to differ from the average.
I also don't drink alcohol, and I don't watch TV or sports. Every time someone says something cryptic I assume it's baseball-related, and I'm right about 40% of the time.
As a fairly new person to the tech industry, I have to say that the average tech job from a dev perspective has a very laid back feeling and usually they try to cater to my happiness. Maybe this is because of who I'm applying to though.
A Canadian City Once Eliminated Poverty and Nearly Everyone Forgot About It
Isn't it at all possible that it's some kind of mistake? Miscommunication, different prices changing at different times, and/or people not caring led to them being priced the same? It's not as if the two options are the same price at every single McDonalds, just this one.
Hi Terry, TempleOS has some really interesting concepts. I'm not sure what it has to do with this topic though. FILE_ID.DIZ is used for archives and not single files, and is used to provide metadata for the contents of the archive.

Saving disk space by compressing and decompressing files on the fly by appending a .Z file extension works, but the compression efficiency for individual files must be less than if you were using a compressed volume from the beginning. Compressing each file individually can't take advantage of common tokens between similar files.

Anyway, thanks for commenting, but I fail to see the correlation and the point you're trying to make. Again, FILE_ID.DIZ is about providing a standardized way of finding out about the contents of an archive, (which I suppose could just have one file, aside from the description file,) and so it isn't really relevant to how TempleOS compresses individual files.
He obviously knows nothing and so fit the ignorant and arrogant American stereotype to a t.
You want to give this project life while learning something and not depending on user-driven content?

Leverage existing software-ranking sites that have stars/reviews, try to scrape them (or use an API if they offer it), quantify that data and put it into a nice webpage.

You will learn:

- APIs/Scraping
- Data Analysis
- Some HTML/CSS/JS

It'll be better than starting a project like this, where you "wait for them to come".
It's older than Rails, I remember the interpreter being described as magic in SICP. It was mentioned as such several times over the course of the book, and was somewhat thematic.

Until, of course, the final chapter (or was it the chapter before the final chapter), where you learned that magic isn't real.
You might enjoy: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-hardest-thing-you-have-eve...

Also worth reading Legionnaire by Simon Murray, although he seems to be more positive about the long term impact on his life.
The author gets tantalizingly close to the answer when he notes that 10 pieces cost $1.49 at Burger King, which is significantly cheaper per nugget than 20 pieces at McDonald's.

The reason 20 pieces cost the same as 10 pieces is to make the customer think they're getting a deal, which will lead them to gravitate toward that item over other items on the menu that are actually lower margin for McDonald's.

That people still buy the 10 piece item at McDonald's is just an example of the fact that though firms are rational, individuals are idiots.
Yes because this is a big issue. Many research chemicals are sold as being LSD. Though the effects can be similar, some of them have unknown side effects and a much lower 'overdose' level. It's practically impossible to overdose on LSD but something like NBOME can be dangerous in as little as 10 hits.
The glaringly obvious explanation is that people are buying the quantity they wish to eat. Why is it so unbelievable that people will buy 10 nuggets instead of 20 for the same price? I'm not going to take 10 extra nuggets and either throw them out or put myself into a food coma.

If we were discussing 1 vs. 2 cans of soup from the local grocery for the same price, of course everyone would buy 2 - you can save the additional can for another day. Here, we're talking about fast food that has to be eaten within a couple of hours. There is no "deal" to be had by buying a larger quantity if you're not willing to eat it.

The only sad thing about this article is the apparent inability to understand why someone won't stuff their face with more food than they can eat without making themselves sick and likely obese.
I enjoy cycling a bucketload. I get a sense of achievement regularly, my health improves, etc. Not a magic bullet but not a high barrier to entry: find a group ride and go.
I found it interesting that the article didn't mention another explanation: maybe people just don't want to waste food.

Perhaps this dilemma can be viewed as a typical example of classical economic 'homo economicus' vs. behavioral economics theories. Classical economic theory would say any rational human would obviously choose 20 over 10 nuggets for the same price. But behavioral economics typically takes into account other factors that classical models ignore to better explain our seemingly "suboptimal" decisions.

I think maybe 10 nuggets is a reasonable number for one person or two children to eat whereas 20 is obviously too much. In a 'fast food' situation where it's unlikely that leftovers would be saved, people may perhaps be choosing less nuggets to adhere to their very rational believe that (any) food should not go to waste.
Maybe it's because main numbers in nuggets price are from serving the client, not from the source material of nuggets.
Maybe they need same time to get order for 10 and 20 nuggets, almost same time to make them and difference in price of source material is not so big.
This is functionally the same thing as a 2-for-1 sale. Not that I really know what such sales are supposed to accomplish, but you see them frequently enough that there must be some reasoning behind it. Maybe getting a free second thing makes you more likely to buy the first one than getting it for half price? Maybe it lets you set the minimum price for "some X" higher than you'd normally be able to?

I really don't know. It may be weird, but this sort of pricing definitely isn't rare.
Well, you're just doing the same exact thing. Instead of hiring someone who might watch a bit of baseball or grab a beer every once in a while, you'd prefer to hire someone just like you. That's still not good.
I don't think many folks would be willing to pay any amount of money for something they get for free.

(This is my viewpoint, so see it from there...)

It is just a mild annoyance at most (to most people) and for the really pro-active, they can just start marking said-recruiters emails as spam, to never see them again.

This market is also loaded with entrants, due to (what I assume) is a very low barrier-to-entry.

The problem in this market is similar to the "make a new language" concept.

"I create a new programming language to rule them all and do it all", and your language just gets added to the list of languages that want to "do it all and rule them all".
Where can you find online courses about design?
I work in security at a large Fortune 500 company. I know at first it sounds like phishing your employees will give you good insight, but you realize quickly that the data you get is not very useful. Here are the roadblocks I've hit with these kinds of simulation phishing services:

1. They rely on e-mail while phishing attacks come from multiple sources like Facebook and LinkedIn. Sadly, using those services to simulate phishing attacks violates their ToS.

2. Simulation phishing only provides pass or fail data meaning you cannot determine your weakest links in the organization. At best you get an "average" snapshot.

3. The data isn't very accurate or precise because there are too many confounding variables involved. Time of day, subject matter, type of phishing (attachment, social engineering, etc). Normally we ran our campaigns once a month but this wasn't enough to produce stable results.

4. Clicking doesn't mean they fell victim to the attack -- lot's of people click to investigate then report the links. Ideally, I'd like to specifically know WHY the employee clicked the link and HOW MUCH was actually at stake.

4. It pisses people off. There is enough animosity against us security folks that tricking your employees really hurts that relationship. People feel taken advantage of.

5. It doesn't actually improve security in any meaningful way. I found that it didn't actually improve people's ability to spot and report phishing attempts. They either became paranoid to the point where they were no longer productive in legitimate emails, or they had no improvements over time.

6. There's a growing body of knowledge that dismisses the effectiveness of this kind of phishing training (http://www.govinfosecurity.com/interviews/training-doesnt-mi...) .

With that being said, our company has tried about a dozen of these kinds of services and the best one so far has been one called Apozy that is rather new. It's a different approach but the data and insight you get back is actually very useful.
No "downvote" or "undo", so not possible.

You could try contacting them but: not worth the hassle
Sometimes, individuals aren't that hungry.
Really interesting read...
It may be absurd, but it's not at all uncommon. Sending group invites via SMS is an incredibly kludgy experience, and following the path of least resistance, is so unrealistic when you have Facebook events at your fingertips. All of your friends are already there, and you merely need to change the details, and Facebook handles all the communication.
What I really don't understand is why they have the McDouble and the Double Cheeseburger. Are people really paying a dollar more for a slice of cheese?! Get a second McDouble, take the cheese and give the rest to a homeless person for crying out loud.
The most terrifying option? It was algorithmically determined and no human really knows for sure.
"A senior developer is intimately familiar with their own failure. They have written code both under, and over designed, and have seen both fail."
I have been developing software full time for 30 years now and this is so true. In fact, it's a well researched bias: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overconfidence_effect
Even in these comments you see new-ish developers supremely confident this is not true because they think know.
That said, there is a place for this delusion, sometimes, due to luck and/or really hard work some team pulls of something the old guy says is going to be hard and that's a great thing.
10pc for 6.40 is overpriced. Burger King or Wendy's equivalence cost less than half of that.
Can you select the geographical region the test is run from? i never found it useful to have a test run from a random geog area. I want to have the same test run from multiple locations every polling period.

Keynote is über expensive but is my favorite monitoring site
Probably just observation.

I've been to google campus on Mt. View and LAX Google (which is really in Venice...).

They're mostly Asian and White. On a Saturday I was visiting a buddy and I swear it was 90% Asian.

Race doesn't really matter, it just that it happen to be there are just many Asian and White in the tech fields.
What browser/OS if you don't mind?
I requested, and the maintainers added a while back, trove classifiers on the Python Package Index to indicate compatibility with Django versions (similar to what was already available for Python versions and some other popular frameworks).

Currently 112 packages on the index classify as Django 1.8 compatible:

https://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=browse&c=605

So encourage package maintainers to use those classifiers, and you'll be able to tell easily which packages are and aren't compatible :)
Why does the ADA allow airplanes, then?
Two people making $25k/yr should be individually paying the taxes on their own $25k. There should be no ability to transfer tax burden between partners. An adult makes $25k, that adult pays the taxes due on $25k. It's not a difficult concept, and puts everyone in the same position, partner or not.
The author's sales data is for undergraduate students, so extrapolating to family meals may be misguided.

That said, I think quantity is key here. There may be a correlation between "concern about calories and transfats" and "need to price discriminate". Those who's buying patterns are less price based (higher income and higher household income while being raised) are possibly more likely to be worries about their consumption habits, whereas buyers for whom price is a big deal want to maximize caloric intake for their $$. Thus, McDonalds is successfully getting a reasonable margin for natural 20pc buyers, and double that for 10pc buyers who wouldn't care about the price anyway.
Work on meditation and social relationships. It sounds like that felony was your biggest stumbling block, which means you'll appreciate growing past it more than anyone else. How can you grow past it? By developing that part of yourself. Work on health and your neurological disorder at the same time you work on these relationships and becoming and feeling normal again. Once you achieve that normality, going beyond it will be such a joy for you :)
Thank you, we appreciate it. :)
there's also google translate to help out
As is mentioned in the article.
Thanks for the kind words, Thomas. Sandboxing is a very minor part of what we do, I'd be happy to share.
That's me actually.

I can buy two gallons of milk at Costco for the price of one gallon at my local store. But I don't buy from Costco because the second gallon always goes bad and I throw it out. Throwing out food feels bad.

Anyway, what do I care about the "free" second gallon if I don't actually drink it?

Edit: hey look, a study:

> A series of experiments demonstrates that consumers exhibit aversion to waste during forward-looking purchase. These experiments further reveal that such behavior is driven by distaste for unused utility, a reaction that is shown to be distinct from an aversion to squandering money. Waste aversion is especially pronounced when consumers anticipate future consequences and deprivation is salient. In addition to demonstrating robustness across consumers and marketing contexts, the results also demonstrate how waste aversion can lead to self-defeating behavior in which consumers forego desired utility.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057740811...
How would they even know the post-tax amount? That is going to depend on your unique financial situation.