1,021 karma · joined July 23, 2013
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/am; my proof: https://keybase.io/am/sigs/JVwLEZKKEGoXRKS1PeXICIym9WK26Yby-BY4uZc1sPY ]
https://chromebusinessdevices.withgoogle.com/products/catego...
It's possible that by following your stance and having pure equality, we will not reach an ideal state that could have been reached, given some short term hires/promotions to create role models which then help others to reach their potential.
Do you dream about AWS, Kubernetes, Docker, and ELK?
Do you want to work with a really smart team on the most exciting and technically challenging problems in the self driving car space?
If so, please contact me via my HN profile, and briefly outline the most impressive thing you have built so far.
We also have many other job openings, please visit https://getcruise.com/careers to search and apply for other positions.
By filling out the application form on our website, you load all the information into the form for me, and are guaranteed that a recruiter will follow up on your entry. If you want to send an email to the hiring manager as well to explain why you are so awesome, that's fine, but it's probably not going to help your chances of getting a job any more than just applying.
From what I've seen, this is pretty similar to San Francisco. It would be interesting to see data comparing the standards across earthquake-prone countries/regions.
Anyway, I had a similar issue with car loans when moving to the US. I've since realized that it's pretty trivial to increase your credit score if you pay a small amount of attention to it. Simply sign up for credit karma, get a few no annul fee credit cards, and put a small purchase on them every few months so that they don't get closed due to inactivity. Within 12 months your credit score will be stellar.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with a gut reaction that positive credit scores are absurdly backwards. It makes sense that I would trust someone more as a borrower if I know they have repaid debts in the past (versus having no history at all). The system could probably use improvements and more regulation, but I don't think it's fundamentally off base.
We're looking for engineers help us build self driving cars. We love solving hard problems, and test our cars daily on the streets of San Francisco and Arizona.
We have many roles on our website, but here are two that we are currently most interested in:
* Experienced C++ engineers to work on tracking and planning algorithms.
* Full-stack or backend engineers (Python / Node.js) to work on data pipelines, fleet management APIs, and internal tooling.
If you want to reach out and talk about the type of work we do, my email is in my profile.
Given that NZ timezone is only 3-5 hrs difference from the west coast of the US, I personally would look for remote work for a US company while living in NZ (salaries and the exchange rate would be strongly in your favor). However, if you need a visa sponsorship this wouldn't be feasible.
We're looking for experienced full stack software engineers to build platforms and tools which support self driving cars. Come and work as part of a super talented team in SF working on really hard problems.
Required: 3+ years experience as a full stack software engineer, and experience with Python or Node.js.
https://jobs.lever.co/cruise/b191d701-95a4-427d-b564-fbf1fda...
If security is really important to you though, you should move image processing to separate isolated servers anyway, and verify magic bytes as described by this site.
The main point of my post was responding to Bitcoin evangelism with counter arguments, so I guess it did come across a little fanboyish. I don't disagree that it would be nice if Bitcoin could become a sort of "layer 1" in the blockchain space, with smart contracts built on top of it using additional protocols (and I believed for the past couple years that this was the most likely outcome for Bitcoin).
The main problem I now have with this model is that there are still missing features in this layer 1 which Bitcoin needs to support before decent solutions can be built on top of it (e.g. 2-way pegged sidechains, which require at least a couple of new opcodes). Every time Bitcoin wants to support a new use case, it requires someone to submit a BIP, months of development work, debating, and a soft fork to implement. For an example, see the recent OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY soft fork. This is not the sort of thing which can be built in layer 2 - it needs to be supported by the underlying blockchain, specifically so that people can build other layer 2 solutions on top of it. This is just one of many features - every few weeks someone suggests a new opcode on the bitcoin mailing list (and they often get shot down). This is why I originally got excited about Ethereum - while the "turing complete" badge is a bit of a buzzword, they really have solved the problem of creating a generic blockchain which can have anything else built on top of it.
Now, this is not to say that Ethereum is entirely without risk. For sure, Bitcoin is a more secure network, and definitely a better place to park your money if you are looking for long term stability. Bitcoin is also optimizing for stability and decentralization over adding shiny new features, which is simply different priorities and not at all a bad thing. Ethereum still have a long road ahead of them, both with attempting to shift a live blockchain to proof of stake, and with scaling (which will probably be even harder than the challenges Bitcoin is currently facing). But overall I find the project to be a very interesting and exciting development in the blockchain space.
It offers a more powerful scripting language to define contracts.
> Ethereum could quickly outdate itself by defining a fixed language.
If offers a "bytecode" type language which can be created by compiling contracts in >=2 languages already. Bitcoin currently lets you define contracts in the equivalent of assembly code, with no higher level languages available. So this statment seems to apply more to Bitcoin than Ethereum.
> Bitcoin could be easily made Turing complete.
Bitcoin developers can't even agree to a simple block size increase. What makes you think they would be able to do something as complex as adding turing-complete scripting capabilities?
> Unless I am missing something, a new currency is simply unnecessary.
Since bitcoin does not support 2-way pegged sidechains yet, it's not possible to launch a new blockchain without launching a new currency to power that blockchain. Besides, you need a way to reward the miners.
> Soon, I am sure a prototype of what I described will be released on bitcion thus obscuring Ethereum.
That's basically what Rootstock[0] is supposed to be. Although at present, it seems to be vaporware.
A year ago I used to have a similar viewpoint to you, that Bitcoin had such a massive first mover advantage and network effects that it would remain the dominant public blockchain, and that even as new inventions appeared, they would be backported to bitcoin. But over the past 6 months I've realized how useless Bitcoin is without a genuine respected leader/BDFL, and now think that without a leader it's doomed to design by committee and stalemate on key decisions, which leaves the playing field wide open for competitors like Ethereum.
Ethereum is a world computer. As in, it acts like a single public computer that can perform computations for anyone who is willing to pay for them, but instead of this computer being run by a third party, it's run by the network as a whole.
This is useful for any situation where you would usually need a trusted third party to perform some computations or enforce one side of a bargain - for example ecommerce/escrow, trading, voting, bets, issuing stock/currency, plus other things that probably have not even been thought of yet.
I agree, it can be a pretty wishy-washy mission statement at times. But then again, so was the idea of a global communications network where anyone could communicate with everyone and publish their own content in the 1980s.
Even a couple years ago when I bought this software, it was pretty obvious that it was mostly abandonware and Google weren't planning on improving/adding any new features any time soon.
For anyone interested in the history, this product was the result of an acquisition by Google (I think they wanted the team for their Google+ Photos product). While they don't seem interested in developing it further, it's nice that they continue to make the software available.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nik_Software [1] http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/google-buys-nik-to-...