JSONwebtoken

No misrepresentation? Like Sundar Pichai and the media conveniently conflating neurosis with the completely unrelated theory of neuroticism? Search "Google memo neurosis" and see how many headlines contain "neurosis" when that word or concept was never referred to even once in the 10 pages.

The acronyms aren't changing, machine learning, deep learning, and neural networks have been around for 50 years. It's only recently that code libraries like TensorFlow have abstracted away a lot of the math to the point that it's relatively accessible to normal people that can write code.

Deep learning is a subset of machine learning that utilizes more than one layer of neural networks. So these terminologies just refer to different parts of the same process. The 'process' is just tweaking a program to progressively make more accurate yes or no assumptions about a set of statistics that you give it. That's my best shot at it, hope it makes sense.

Sure, if you ignore the advancements of NLP in the past few years. Sometimes I wish I had NLP in my terminal to autocorrect my typos.

I basically had to put up with that every day in the college library. I don't mind glass offices until I get the itch to pick my nose. I get that the optimal environment for programming work is at home or in a private office, but they did what they could at what appears to be an economical compromise. I agree with the desk space, there doesn't appear to be any room for an external monitor at all.

I don't know the degree of complexity or technical ambition of the project you were a part of, but it's not unusual for a 23 year old guy to write most of the Ethereum app. In fact, that's probably the reason why most ICOs are a scam, there's an insanely low barrier to building a proof of concept. The boilerplate is like 15 lines.

When it's so easy that any 20 year old backend dev can issue a token, you should already know that no ETH-based app should be worth more than the same business model applied to a fiat currency.

I don't get the complaints, that looks very cozy even if you have to share with what looks like a total of 4 engineers per room which is a reasonable number for collaboration. The second picture makes it look greater than 4, however.

Assuming the cubicles are walled off, it'll just feel like a college library meeting room.

Being neurotic is hardly an insult in the first place, it's a reversible state of mind. But searching "google + neurotic" showed that a significant number of news outlets made the same convenient mistake as Sundar Pichai. It's not like their reader base would be aware of the actual definition or bother to look it up. It sounds like a bad word so it is.

I count 34 sources and 3 graphs that were completely omitted by journalists and conveniently tuned out by all the know-it-alls who said he cited zero sources and were therefor more qualified to assert their reasoning on this subject than a Harvard trained Systems Bioligist.

Omission by convenience has become the language of the media and those too weak and unprepared to argue their viewpoints against centuries of scientific consensus.

I doubt it. The women threatening to quit over twitter would still do the same thing if a social media post attached to his name and job went viral.

Make no mistake, it's his views that he was fired over, not the medium in which he shared them. Google made no indication otherwise.

The brevity and aesthetics of async/await has made me reluctant to move back to any pyramid type async chain. I don't know if it's good practice, but I use typescript to declare an optional null type and just return a null from inside the async function if I need to cancel.

It's funny that I read past this line without even thinking about how unusual it is that it needs a source. I've read so many blogposts and tweets about how it's justifiable to punch people in the face over specific disagreements that I'm completely desensitized to the hilarious image of grown, educated adults lashing out just because they're losing an argument.

It seems like every time I make a politically controversial post on Reddit and increasingly HN, I can just CTRL-F my comment inbox and assure myself that there's some reference to punching in there.

As a non-white man, please show me where I can find these normal entry level jobs that pay six-figures out of college. Please, I have student loans and my mother is sick.

> Only someone who is not a woman or not from a minority could say this. People tend to dismiss other peoples problem or minimize them, even when those people are telling they are hurting.

Only someone who is a woman or from a minority with liberal views could say this. How can you speak for 70% of people? How are you hurting from being treated equally to the 30%?

He's a Harvard trained Systems Biologist (3 years into a PHD based on LinkedIn). If his educational qualifications aren't enough for an unofficial rant, all of the graphs and hyperlinks he used as external references were edited out by journalists before it was mass distributed.

> They can put anything they want into it, even $0. Those pledges aren't even enforced. A country can pledge whatever, and change their mind later.

Sounds like unlimited vacation. If anybody is trying to sell you something that's "free," you're probably getting a bad deal.

Especially if the only reason it's free for other participants is because they don't expect it to be free for you.

I didn't even say anything about global warming, only the fallibility of such an open-ended agreement structure. I wonder why I'll get down-voted hmm...

I know the people I wouldn't want to work with, and they plaster their names and beliefs all over social media for the world to see.

I'm mature enough to get past my views and work with people of different viewpoints as I've had to do all the way through college and my professional life. I was told this was the whole purpose of group exercises in high school and college but I suppose like many things, that applies to only privileged people such as I.

The difference is I actually have to practice what I learned from carrying other people's grades in college for every single day in my professional life for as long as somebody catches wind of my political alignment and threatens to quit if my company doesn't remove me. It's a team sport after all.

The mistake Google made was thinking that they don't have 100 conservative-leaning employees also willing to martyr themselves in the shadow of the original author's exit.

What are they going to do when someone else steps up and makes the same assertions with more tact? Fire him too? What about the person after them? They gave extraordinary leverage not to the person that they fired, but to the people that have not been fired yet.

It's uncharacteristically nontechnical of Google to think that of the anywhere between 30-50% of the US population that leans conservatively, there is only one of them working for Google in Mountain View and that any dissenting thoughts within the company will end with him, and that the liberal employees threatening to quit will be happy and sated just to see these few drops of blood.

It doesn't matter the size of the check Google cuts this guy, nor the next 100 individuals if they choose to also speak out. Google made a mountain out if a molehill, and they just left a very a long way for the snowball they just threw to gather some mass while rolling down.

Why did you present it as if this is just something that the guy "believes?" I thought that was the strongest argument of his memo and the perhaps the point with the biggest scientific backing.

If you wanted to pick out any argument out of those 10 pages to disassemble, you could have chosen any one of his arguments that haven't been corroborated by hundreds of years of scientific consensus.

It says a great deal that some people won't concede that a company like Google doesn't have "hiring practices which can effectively lower the bar for 'diversity' candidates" even if the author was much more politically correct in their verbiage.

Forgive me if I'm conflating two groups, but isn't it the same people saying Google is incapable of doing such a thing whom are also defending the practice of affirmative action at universities?

I don't understand how affirmative action is deemed acceptable and even encouraged and at universities to improve diversity numbers, but somehow it's inconceivable that a company like Google could lower the bar to hire employees whom have already had the bar lowered for them since the day they were accepted into college?

Assuming 1) is a true premise and 2) ??? is some black box function, it's hard to reason in any way that 3) is not true to some extent. When you change the input, you would expect the output to change unless you can somehow argue that ??? is f(x) = C. You can say step 2) is egregious handwaving, but as long as you cannot prove f(x) is a constant, 3) is true.

What a tragedy

So if everything is already an art, why include it in the acronym?

How is your solution any different to the other hundreds of FSBO platforms currently operating? What value does it bring over Redfin or Zillow? Why would real estate agents, escrow agents, mortgage brokers want to work with you if it means a lower fee for them?

Sure. If I had a billion in the bank, I'd be 100% for bribing the common folk with their own tax revenues. As a rich person, the only thing preferable to no taxes is exorbitantly high taxes so no-one else can get rich and my relative purchasing power remains high. Brilliant plan.

Why do these discussions always devolve into talks about punching people or getting punched? I can't get through a day without somebody suggesting violence is the only response to get somebody to think like them.

If you don't want these "programs" to exist at the professional level, you have to go all the back to college and high school. You can only continue to treat symptoms through affirmative action, because that is the cycle we're stuck in. That is the disease you are identifying. People who are propped up by outside assistance will naturally continue to depend on those props and leech resources at a disproportionate rate.

When these props are removed, the whole thing comes crashing down and we'll be forced to face the reality that these issues can't be fixed from a top down approach. Hiring more women or minorities into tech won't trickle down into incentivizing more women/minorities to major in Computer Science. Accepting more women/minorities into CS programs won't encourage more women/minorities to become interested in nerdy stuff in high school.

The real disease is third party intervention. Thinking all the world's problems can be solved as long as it looks like somebody's doing something for a long enough period of time. All that does is allow under-qualified individuals to shit the pool for the demographic that they represent and reinforce negative perspectives until people who pay for productive work can't turn a blind eye and then get punched in the face I suppose.

If Marissa Mayer is the best female candidate that comes to mind, then that proves the best candidate for the job does not happen to be female.

So this guy in Amsterdam happens to be a prodigious programmer who reads lots of books and lands a sequence of full time jobs due to people seeing potential in him. After several years, he quits his well paying job to start a business at 22 much to the vexation of his mother.

This feels like the ending to Jobs (2013). Where's the rest of the story?

Why should I not deserve to be in the top 20%? I worked hard, studied diligently, and obtained rare and pragmatic skills so that I may live my life to a greater degree of contentedness than 80% of people.

Why should I not I want my kids to grow up with the privileges of the top 20%? I worked the hours of 3 standard people over my lifetime to accumulate the wealth I want to pass onto my offspring to secure my genetic legacy. Aren't I just fulfilling what biology deems as life's most imperative mission?

Why should I feel hated for cashing in the chips on a successful venture that would have failed 9 out of 10 other times? Starting a business already has negative expected value, so why is it on the 1 out of 10 times that I succeed, 40% of what I win gets taken away?

Why should I want to live my life to the same degree of effort and reward as every else? What is the point of living life in such a manner, as governed by some impenetrable limiter of success and reward, it would be like being stuck for the rest of your life on tutorial island in Runescape, where you can't burn your shrimp on the campfire and you can't die to monsters, as that is where 100% of accounts begin their lives and where 80% of accounts never log back in.