jkyle

I've had the opposite experience. Except for very small companies or startups almost every company of size I've worked for or interviewed reimburses for continuing education.

Graduate level algorithms is a required course. Many of the courses in the Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence tracks are very math intensive.

"Isn't phenomenal" is hard to qualify. It's kind of relative to what you consider phenomemal.

I've always done well academically relative to my peers. Most of the courses are on some kind of curve. So I've done fine in OMSCS.

I guess what I'm getting at is...if you've done good enough academically in the past and you're willing to apply your full effort, you'll likely do well at OMCS.

The fact that automobiles are on the road for longer than ever and their life expectancy keeps growing makes me think they're getting better at reliability and maintainability rather than worse.

edit

I also find AAA much better than crawling under my car in the middle of the night 50 miles away from anything...in general. But I know that's a personal preference.

Since the opposite would be entirely impossible to prove (that Costello did not receive any mail), it certainly would be on Zavodnik to prove they were sent and received.

This is what the whole "You've been served" process is about.

Or they starved to death. With their kids. Or they started selling themselves or their children to get by.

If you go back a little further than 100 years (in the U.S. anyway). They were also relatively likely to get together a bunch of folks with guns and weapons and murder men, women, and children and take their land to make their own.

I'm not sure the hutzpa of 100 and 200 years ago is exactly what we should aspire to.

It's in the 'reports' link. [1]

1. http://www.southerneducation.org/Our-Strategies/Research-and...

I bet some even have code like that stored in their snippets library.

You're forgetting Social Security, which is a regressive tax system as it is not taxed on income over ~$118k. You're also forgetting things like Medicare. Both SS and Medicare carry an employer contributed tax, which is a hidden tax on the employee (employers just adjust wages to accommodate the extra taxation).

Finally, within the context of comparison to other nation's benefits structures, you're forgetting health care expenses which are included in most western tax systems.

Health care is also regressive in that it comprises a greater proportion of expense for lower income earners and carries a 'hidden cost' in the form of employer supplemental payments. It's perfectly valid to include these costs when comparing to other nations or to alternative tax & benefits proposals which include expanded health care.

By including or excluding varying costs and expenses, the cost to earnings curves bend dramatically....even with the AMT. The fact is, the answer to this question is not a single acronym. And the discussion can't even legitimately begin until some ground truth on what services and benefits are and/or should be included.

I don't see how it had an impact on revenue if ads weren't displaying

1. browsing hacker news sees interesting article, uses ad block.

2. posts link to Facebook

3. link gets propagated across Facebook and clicked by 1000's who do not use ad block

4. x1000's

You can think of ad block users like carriers. They show no symptoms, but could be the man vector for distribution of your content. So they may have a value that can't be measured in ad clicks.

The interesting question is if they saw a subsequent fall in ad revenue indicating a correlation between ad block users and more ad revenue.

There's a good chance you'll do about as good as 50% of the stock market investors(or more counting fees lost)

A naive response may be "well, then. I'll invest in the other 50%...".

It's important to note that no one, to date, has shown they're capable of predicting who which survive, which fail, and which beat the markets. And if such a person or persons exit that can do so they're sure as hell not sharing it with you.

Or public transit or riding a bike, etc.

You have a right to not have violence initiated against you

This is a right of outcome. The outcome of not having violence committed against your person or property.

Rights of outcome vs rights of opportunity are a false dichotomy. All rights are a right for some specific outcome and are considered violated when that outcome does not occur.

I believe you have the right of opportunity, but not of outcome.

I may be assuming too much, but in most don't really believe this.

For example, I'd wager you firmly believe you have the right to a safe and secure society such that you are relatively confident you will no be randomly murdered in your sleep with no consequences for the murderer.

This is exactly a right to the outcome of a minimum level of security in your person and property.

If you do hold this belief then you believe in right of outcome in society. Though you may not agree with others what outcomes we should be guaranteed.

I did. Programming oriented courses were my strongest subjects.

Ostensibly, these publications are written in addition to the services rendered for grants.

If an author received a grant specifically to write a book on a topic, then I'd say yes. This is rarely, if ever, the case.

With research, however, it is the norm not the exception that they are paid for or subsidized through some form of public funding.

Ostensibly, the company is receiving some sort of value from the free plan users. Increase of adoption rates and "buzz" come to mind.

The problem isn't the subsidies. The problem occurs when the proportion of solar users increases such that the utility's margins become low enough to threaten the minimum budget required to maintain the infrastructure.

If you want to subsidize solar users to bootstrap that market and as a general social good, that's fine. But you have to structure it such that the utility still recoups the cost of maintenance. If they're paying market instead of spot, the paid price is not taking into account the cost of transfer and storage to the utility.

He'd have never passed a Google interview. ^_^

I've seen people with PhDs from top schools who couldn't code their way out of a paper bag

A computer science PhD, in my humble opinion, does not teach how to program anymore then having PhD of Architecture teaches you how to build a residential home. If it did, there'd be much more time spent learning about tooling and practicing programming instead of reading papers and generating novel research.

If I were hiring C.S. PhD's, I would not be judging them on the quality of their code or proficiency in any particular language.

Lots of interview processes today deal with culture fit at the end, but should it be item 1 and then coding skill item 2?

Culture fit should be focused on areas of professional interest, general preferred work modes, and possibly professional ethos (e.g. you're a big open source shop, are they an advocate?).

Many interviewers and companies think culture fit applies to non-professional aspects like do they like bicycles, wear the same clothes, like the same music. Unfortunately, this is easily filtered through unconscious and unintentional racial, gender, and age biases because what the interviewer is really doing is determining if the candidate is "like me".

It's the second interpretation that annoys and intimidates candidates and is probably a root cause to much of the diversity issues faced by the tech industry.

Paywall.

USAToday is covering the story without paywall. [1]

Quick read indicates they aren't 'throttling' they're serving lower quality (e.g. smaller) videos to mobile users so as not to use up their data plan as much while they develop a feature allowing users to select their own stream quality in app.

Seems reasonable enough.

They should have been more up front about it though.

Edit

Ok, now I'm confused. How does this story relate to the existing feature to lower your streaming quality? [2]

1. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2016/03/25/netflix-t...

2. https://help.netflix.com/en/node/87

It seems like many people on this forum would be considered by many psychiatric professionals to be suffering from delusions about the government,

The way the OP framed the therapist's response, sure. Of course, they're telling their perspective on what the therapist responded.

Having worked with therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and studied it to some degree in my early college including internships the more typical concern of a therapist is not the veracity of your beliefs (they're largely irrelevant), but the degree to which they are causing distress and if that distress is to a level that it interferes with your ability to function in society and form meaningful relationships With 'meaningful' defined by your personal satisfaction with the relationships and the satisfaction of those you have relationships with.

This is the criteria for all behaviors in the DSM that causes a spectrum of behaviors or beliefs to shift on the continuum of 'normal' to 'abnormal' for the purpose of diagnosis.

In practice, that means they could care less if you think the government (or God, or FSM, or Xenu) is watching your every move...but only if that keeps you from leaving your house or causes you significant distress. Or kept you from forming relationships because you thought they were government agents.

For example, here is the definition of delusion from the DSM V

Delusion. A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture* (e.g., it is not an article of religious faith). When a false belief involves a value judgment, it is regarded as a delusion only when the judgment is so extreme as to defy credibility.*

Emphasis mine. The point is by virtue of most people in the subculture of hackers believe this way means that, by definition, it is not delusional.

But again, if it keeps you from getting to the grocery store it would likely be worth considering medication. ;)

Some women jump right up and get back into the swing of things.

Even 25 year olds in the shape of olympic champions take a week or so to be back in the full swing of things. The first few days are limited movement. A couple of weeks is more reasonable, particularly since two weeks of bonding is highly recommended (for both mother and father). Skin to skin! :)

I'm not saying there isn't a woman out there, somewhere, who had a kid at noon and was ready for work the next morning. But that's incredibly rare, certainly not anything to expect or plan for.

That being said, if a founder missing a few adequately planned for weeks of full time work kills a company it probably wasn't going anywhere anyway. Not that the investors would see it that way.

The way his comment read to me is he felt compelled to tinker because of flaws in the device like bad firmware or poor design that didn't seem to work well for him.

So he switched to a device that worked well enough so he did not feel that compulsion. After all, he could equally choose to jail break his iOS device and tinker with it. But there's no reason (for him) to do so.

What you're saying is that you left the freedom of your device to jail yourself into simple interface...?

That's an incredibly hyperbolic way to spin their choice. No one's in prison here. A choice was made based on desired functionality and features. And they paid for that choice out of their own free will.

They've chosen 'the jail of a simple interface' the same way someone who gets tired of working on a classic car just to keep it running as a hobby decides they'd like to buy an A8 has imprisoned themselves to the dregs of luxury car use and bumper to bumper manufacturer maintenance.

Alright, I'll bite...

Why is echo -n risky?

Well, they can "compel" in the sense that they can demand the owner release it.

The owner can refuse and suffer the legal consequences.

In such a case, has there ever been a precedent of going to the safe manufacturer and compelling them to break into the safe? Have they ever then required all safe makers to make exploitable safes with master keys?

Yes, but these things don't occur in a vacuum. For example, the word 'boy' was used demean african american males by whites for much of our history. Now even if they are, in fact, a young male using that word in reference to an african male is about as offensive as it can get.

It may be unfortunate that because men oppressed women for so long that there are certain conventions that have taken on offensive connotations. But I assure you, the inconvenience of getting your own coffee is nothing compared to the experiencing the history leading to that act taking on a negative implication.

I've never worked in an office where people took turns fetching coffee for each other as a matter of routine though I'm sure some do. I seriously doubt there's a wave of women refusing to take a turn in such an ordered affair. I personally know and seen of many, many women who've been told to fetch coffee for a room full of equals that are men.

the trouble is you constantly have to ask yourself "could this statement be read the wrong way"

It's only really a trouble if you're in the habit of being casually offensive. If you're not, it's just a small check no different than when in a group being generally polite and respectful.

Ultimately, in my experience those who are most bothered and vocal in their complaints about being considerate tend to also be those that are most likely to do offensive things like objectifying women, making racially offensive remarks, etc.

it is like posting everything you do on tumblr, where the term originated.

This is incorrect. Microaggression is a theory developed at Harvard in the 1970's by psychiatrist Chester Pierce. [1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression_theory

I'm confused how it's associated with the FMLA. The FMLA benefits apply equally to men and women (12 weeks unpaid in 12 months).

You won't hear any dissent from me when it comes to improving our lack luster family leave support.

However, telling a woman she doesn't take her career seriously is a different matter. You cannot assume to know that woman's situation, her commitment to her job, her resources for child care, etc. She may have a stay at home husband. She could have a full time nanny. Her commitment, as an individual, may be no more or less than any of her coworkers.

Further, U.S. law (as abysmal as it is) on family leave is egalitarian. Both men and women may take up to 12 weeks leave in a 12 month period after the birth. Two states, including CA, extend 6 weeks of subsidized pay to both men and women. Most companies extend the same "bonding period" allowance to both men and women (generally taken out of their base vacation).

The only exception I've seen that women get aside from men is an extra couple of weeks if they have a cesarean. But again, this is entirely up to the private company issuing the benefits. The state is equal in the benefits it allots.

Thus, dismissing a woman through this verbalization is more about stereotyping than any reality with regard to disparity in benefits. And the perceived risk is as much about cultural and corporate biases on care taking. Which is why it is a microagression.