HN user
I see clouds in the sky, and green grass. It has been fifty years and I am sitting in the park with my dog, feeding ducks and watching the local children at play. I haven’t uttered the phrase “type-safety” in years. All the startups are gone. I am free.
MV arises naturally. You can run the entire application logic without UI components, and you can test it that way also.
Other abstractions are designed similarly to allow tests against pieces of the internal API in total isolation, though separated on different lines. Maybe you have transient state stored in view models while persisted state is stored in models. The isolation only helps as size grows, and it can keep size under control mostly by having a good data model for what each component / layer / aspect actually does.
It makes it easier to rewire everything when you start with a switchboard. UI changes are either "Oh my god we're going to have to re-write so much stuff if we do it that way!" and you wind up not making drastic UI changes or "Sure, we can make that thing tickle the controller instead of that other thing."
Why not? Someone working their ass off for $300k shouldn't pay more tax than someone banking $300k in "long term" capital gains.
ShhhHHHhhhhhhh! I'm tricking the questioner into learning some math.
Newton's method and other numerical methods are the hello world of machine learning.
Why numerical methods?
* They might produce the right answer
* They frequently do
* They are easy to visualize or imagine
* You get used to working with a routine that is both fallible but quite simple and remarkably able to work in a wide variety of situations. This is what machine learning does, but there are more sophisticated routines.
At some point you need to make a decision to go down the road more focused on analysis & modelling vs machine learning & prediction. It's not that the two are exclusive, but they really do seek to address really big forks in the problem space of using a computer to eat up data and -- give me predictions or give me correct answers
Google needs lots of prediction to fill in holes where no data may ever exists. Analysis and modeling can really fall down when there is no data to confirm a hypothesis or regress against.
An engineer needs a really good model or the helium tank in the Falcon 9 will explode one time in twenty vs one time in a trillion. The model can predict, based on the simulation of the range of parameters that will slip through QA, how many tanks will explode. Most prediction methods are not trying to solve problems like this and provide little guidance on how to set up the model.
On the prediction side, you will learn all the neural net and SVM stuff.
On the analysis and modelling side, get ready for tons of probability and Monte Carlo stuff.
They are all fun.
he just thinks a large percentage of the people that recommend them haven't read much of them.
Donald Trump just thinks a lot of things.
The author never made a valid argument, but lot of people up-voted, an indicator of the growing friction between the plutocrats and the plebeians.
Librarians often don't realize that they can't keep plugging in method bodies and get what they want forever. Engineering isn't f&@!ing Madlibs for Christ's sake. Learn to build things that will work 100% of the time and never compromise!
source?
They can lie about having the means to fulfill the contract or any basis to pay damages etc. CEO is a good job to lie from. You can always complain that your employees should have made you filthy rich so that you could fulfill your promises.
One reason I quit was that all of the mounting promises were predicated on me in the end. If that's true, go alone instead of giving yourself bread through a middle-man.
People talking about getting ink need to focus a little more on the underlying issue, the gas-lighting of greedy "founders". My employment contract & bonus contract had to all be walked out on as it was all predicated on my CEO being trustworthy. I recently met up with several other employees who didn't get paid for the end of their contracts either. The thing we liked most about talking was figuring out it definitely wasn't our problem.
If the author's reading this, it sounds like you're fairly early in your career and learned a tough business lesson the hard way
Yeah. Second that. Experience is good. Knowing what it all actually looks like, the phrases, the mannerisms, is very valuable. You can take bigger risks when you know how the terrain rolls.
As an example of my senses getting more developed, recently I talked to a "CEO" of some startup I was interviewing and asked about someone else I liked who I knew at the company from earlier. Check this out:
"Oh, yeah [person] is really great...blah blah blah."
"So how is [person] doing?"
"Oh, well, they decided they wanted to do something else...blah blah blah."
Complete total waste of time was brewing if I didn't probe into the non-specific answer that artfully implied that [person] hadn't left the company and was soon part of my awesome team. I would have at the least researched them more. When you have to waste time on things like this, it makes getting where you want to be way harder and makes it harder to justify risks.
Look at that waterfall Gantt chart! Marvel of management!
Tax net worth
Normally most companies have a clause specifically saying you can't claim to work for them after you leave the company.
Normally. Normally. One would think that I would ride the company's reputation, not the other way around.
This answer feels 100% correct. If I consider a 3rd party perspective, I'd say it's completely ridiculous. Companies should be busy being companies, not suing over something so obviously non-damaging.
So let's add a little context.
I have back-salary that's overdue. I asked for a timeline. I got no timeline. I said I would sue in a month. I got a bunch of nasty stuff back.
I told one of the board members that I had resigned. They had no idea that I had resigned (almost three months ago), and I'm guessing that they were also the primary source of new leads for the company to raise. This is where "damages" and "best interests of the company" arguments seemingly deserve analysis.
My desire to distance myself from the company cannot be decoupled from my potential motive to derail the company by breaking the news. While I would consider it 100% right to enforce the ethics of disclosure on the company, I would prefer 100% legal if it goes to court, which it would do so as a big waste of time, but one that might require my attention.
I desire to spend zero time on this, and the other party has contacted me with the desire to also have no further interaction.
That's all fine, but what about the back-salary? A 3rd party would be right to say that I'm only after it because I don't want to be intimidated away from getting what's mine. A healthy course seems to wait for them to boil down and for me to get more stable in my new roll before asking for the payment.
The board member will probably want answers, so I won't totally be done for now yet.
And just three weeks ago, the CEO wanted to meet me in SF to catch up...
It was a startup, so we have like a gazillion cumulative hours of experience being sued, going to court etc, over exactly such silly and needless documents.