mcgwiz

Reminds me of the IMHO under-appreciated https://glitch.com, but for more languages.

Reasi | Senior Software Engineer | Los Angeles, CA | Remote - US | Full-time | https://reasi.com

Looking for a challenge? We're passionate about modernizing the real estate industry because buyers and sellers deserve better than the nerve-wracking, fraud-prone, disjointed and expensive manual processes they currently endure. This is a huge market but it has high institutional and cultural barriers - our success is driven entirely by our expertise, creativity, agility, and action.

Stack: AWS, Docker, Ethereum/Solidity, PostgreSQL, TypeScript, Node.js/Koa, React, Jest, Bootstrap/Sass, <tech you recommend>.

Senior Software Engineer:

- full-stack web/mobile developer who specializes in any of the following: blockchain, DevOps / site reliability, graphic design, data science;

- has a number of challenging projects under their belt, providing the drive and experience to identify and deliver our most impactful business needs; and

- is an effective interpersonal communicator and mentor with acute attention to detail and strong opinions about software architecture and teamwork.

Please reach out for more information: jobs@reasi.com.

All CSS "frameworks" should be thought of as utility libraries, including Bootstrap. If you apply the framework classes directly to your HTML, you've tightly-coupled your HTML (which is already tightly-coupled to your information architecture) to an implementation detail of your presentation code.

Most frameworks support some kind of re-use of CSS declaration blocks - use that feature to build your components from the primitives they provide, but also add a layer of indirection by putting those components behind a semantic class name. Voila, loose-coupling with all the productivity benefits of the frameworks.

    <button class="login-button">Login</button>

    .login-button { @apply .btn-primary; }

    .btn-primary { @apply .font-bold .py-2 .px-4 .rounded; }

Reasi | Senior Software Engineer | Los Angeles, CA | Remote - US | Full-time | https://reasi.com

Looking for a challenge? We're passionate about modernizing the real estate industry because buyers and sellers deserve better than the nerve-wracking, fraud-prone, disjointed and expensive manual processes they currently endure. This is a huge market but it has high institutional and cultural barriers - our success is driven entirely by our expertise, creativity, agility, and action.

Stack: AWS, Docker, Ethereum/Solidity, PostgreSQL, Node.js/Koa, React, Jest, Bootstrap/Sass, <tech you recommend>.

Senior Software Engineer:

- full-stack web/mobile developer who specializes in any of the following: blockchain, DevOps / site reliability, graphic design, data science;

- has a number of challenging projects under their belt, providing the drive and experience to identify and deliver our most impactful business needs; and

- is an effective interpersonal communicator and mentor with acute attention to detail and strong opinions about software architecture and teamwork.

Please reach out for more information: mike+hn@reasi.com.

18/20 the quiz just crystallized my distaste Arial.

Interesting but probably not very useful.

Major public websites invest heavily in SEO. So practically speaking, what the user actually wants can often be better surfaced with Google (which draws upon a great number of signals) than with on-site search (which could merely be backed by elasticsearch or by a relatively simple homegrown system).

Interesting, but I think how much you need is none of their business at the beginning of your relationship. How much you need depends largely on your healthcare needs, child or adult care needs including educational and developmental needs, current level of debt, etc. There's also a lot of subjectivity involved - do you need to travel across the country to visit your parents? Do you need to take a $1000 webinar to refresh/expand your skills? Do you need gigabit connectivity? Do you need a fuel efficient car?

How would he have responded to one of these replies?

"I need x dollars annually. That's also how much I want."

"How much I need is a personal question that I don't feel comfortable answering. How much I want is ..."

Or even,

"How much effort do you want me to put into my work? How much effort do you need me to put into my work?"

The main reason I fell in love with the HP 48 calculator series was the RPL programming language, which could be described as the pragmatic lovechild of Forth and Lisp - think Forth with higher-order functions.

Correct link: http://nytimes.com/2016/04/27/technology/apple-q2-earnings-i...

So much This. ISPs could also advertise "we pass subsidies on from our preferred partners (web businesses) to you. [fine print: traffic with non-preferred partners is deprioritized]." That's not a value proposition that everyone, or even many, would accept but it's one that should be permitted and subject to (adequately competitive) market forces rather than regulation.

I think understanding this situation completely requires an enormous amount of empathy. Whether one agrees with the protesters or not, it's unfair to characterize them merely as fighting against freedom of speech. I am sure they recognize the speech aspect of this, but to them, that is second to what they perceive to be the central issue: equality. Arguable perhaps, but I hold that the issue of equality trumps that of speech.

This issue is related is part of a larger trend whereby arguably minor transgressions trigger significant protest (see the Atlantic's coverage of Oberlin). My take is that after an oppressed class completes the initial leaps and bounds toward equality, tactics of old (e.g. nonviolent peaceful protest) cease to effect further change. New tactics therefore must evolve in order to close the remaining gap. This gap is relatively small, but its size isn't the point - the fact that a gap, based merely on class identification, exists at all should not be accepted.

The current tactics might not be perfect - I posit they are still evolving. But they do effectively utilize available resources and processes (e.g. content virality) to draw massive attention to issues.

As for their characterization by MSM (e.g. the protesters are "bullies", they have fostered what is uncharitably called a "victimhood culture") we are simply observing (or participating in) the attempt to resolve cognitive dissonance between evidence of social inequality and the intellectual status quo.

I thought about this too. The current HN title is basically the title used for this article on the NYT homepage. Prepending "New York Mayor" clarifies the significance of this "De Blasio" fellow.

<bikeshedding> Both titles have merit, both titles have flaws. Granted, in the shorter title, it's unclear that the "requirement" is of the school to offer it, not of the students to take it. In the longer title, who cares that it hasn't been formally announced yet, and it's unclear upon whom the deadline is placed. </bikeshedding>

Can't please 'em all.

Eh. Small fish eat other small fish. Sometimes they mutually eat each other, to abuse the metaphor.

You disingenuously left out the Region column from your copy of the table from the article you linked, which entirely alters the meaning of "Total Downtime". Any explanation for that?

Why the downvotes?

Yes, by backing away from issuing summons for minor offenses, there is overlap with what many have rightly sought in the aftermath of Eric Garner's death. To me, that silver lining is coincidental, and it's taking the thunder out of their protest. As a New York City resident who has been closely following the issue, I do fear that the police, with tacit approval by their unions, will expand/escalate their protest (not by harassing minorities, in case that's how my original comment came across) by further scaling back enforcement of crime.

This fear, after all, is exactly what they're trying to leverage.

Agreed. But they want a reaction, and my fear is that they will expand/escalate their protest until they get one.

Er, or be skeptical, raise the moral issue, and build pressure on Facebook to proceed in a socially responsible way.

Do you mean people should stop working toward a more equitable compromise the moment a short-term solution is on the table?

Fair point about citizens in developing countries being forced to focus on the short-term. But does that mean it's right for Facebook to take advantage of them in a way that, in the long-term, is questionable at best?

This is about more than just providing heating oil or railroads... this is about their entire information infrastructure, and they're in no position to negotiate.

Because the people that live in those developing countries are fellow human beings, and generally have no economic/political power relative to Facebook and other MNCs.

> The things that take off are usually created in a short time.

Fair enough, but that's totally anecdotal. A helluva a lot (<-- carefully imprecise) of systems created in a short amount of time also flop. Is a short amount of a time a cause of success? And who's to say they won't have an early access program to help build-measure-learn?

I do think the notion of putting such a long timeframe around a tech project is naive, but it could be done as a matter of any number of non-tech reasons (setting public/shareholder expectations of two separate companies first/foremost, as well as ensuring resourcing from three orgs).

Very cool. Did anyone else notice that the direction of many of the gestures were reverse of the "natural" motion. I.e. to scroll left, the hand gestures to the left, rather than to the right as if you're dragging the viewport to the right. Also, to zoom in, the thumb and index finger are brought together, rather than spread apart as if you're dragging to points on the viewport away from each other.

Obviously this would all be configurable but it's strange to work on something to reduce HCI friction while using a design that's counterintuitive.

It's a complex problem, but with a "training/welcome period" (explained below) for new users, these specific issues can be addressed:

- experts (users having rep above EXPERT_THRESHOLD, say 5000) want "interesting" questions

- most new questions are not interesting

- "new users" (having rep below some REGULAR_THRESHOLD, say 100) are not educated and have unrealistic expectations

- it is expensive for the community to manually educate new users

- asking questions is inexpensive for the asker, but answering questions is costly to the community (to research, comment, close, find dupes)

- it's hard for new users to gain rep by answering questions because rep-whores are more experienced with the site. thus new users are instead encouraged to gain rep by asking questions.

Some ideas mentioned on SE would help:

- require rep for asking questions

- give rep for finding duplicates (discouraging repwhores from answering dupes, encouraging dupe linking)

- give rep for taking a quiz about the 2-Minute Tour or other FAQs

Additionally, a training/welcome period for new users (during which they interact a slightly more among themselves than directly with experts) would go a long way toward fixing a lot of deeper issues. New user questions (which tend to be uninteresting dupes) would be hidden from experts for some period of time NEW_Q_DUR (say 1 day). During that time, only other new users or regular users can answer the question. Experts can un-hide them with a Setting but can only comment, not answer. Benefits:

- new/regular users (that care about the site) are incentivized to answer questions, find dupes, work with others at their rep-level and do some of the (educational) activities that experts see as menial, rather than just ask questions

- experts get a higher signal/noise ratio of interesting questions, as bad questions can be cleaned up by new/regular users and interesting questions will likely remain unanswered after NEW_Q_DUR (since new users tend to be less experienced and less able to answer difficult, good questions from other new users)

- dupe rep-whoring is mitigated because once a rep-whore becomes an expert, they cannot answer dupe questions without new/regular users having time NEW_Q_DUR to flag as dupe

- new user expectations are made more realistic. until they've participated a certain amount, they cannot expect to draw immediate attention from experts. also, they become aware of the dupe problem.

A caveat might be that new user questions with enough upvotes can become answerable by experts before the normal time limit. Also, if/when new user question quality improves, NEW_Q_DUR can be reduced.

Some very minor drawbacks:

- new users would be slightly deterred from asking certain questions because they do not value answers from non-experts (leading them to do more research on their own)

- more class-ful community, potentially creating stronger biases (I don't think this is too bad because class mobility is clear and feasible)

- some new users that would care about the site might instead be turned off by the welcome period on some principal and never participate

Nothing special about my current home office (which consists of a desk in my bedroom), but back when I lived in Brooklyn, I had a makeshift standing desk with a nice view of Manhattan.

http://www.scrambledbrains.net/2011/02/20/standing-desk-conf...

A lot of commenters disagree with the "no dating" and "no alcohol" recommendations. But how many of these commenters are men and how many are women? For men to reject a recommendation put forth in the interest of women might be self-serving and establishmentarian.

A tally of both the ayes and nays to those recommendations from women would be most interesting to me.

For the record, I'm male and I'd be fine with those rules even if they didn't make the workplace more supportive of women. I don't pick my job based on whether I can date at work or drink at work (as long as there's no policy against pursuing those things with colleagues outside of work). But perhaps I'm an oddball because I prefer my relationship with coworkers to be strictly professional by default, and only override that on an individual basis; however, the norm in tech companies seems to be shifting away from this (even outside SV).

Rather than all the engineers and tech-minded people here naysay the idea into oblivion, I think it's worthwhile that we encourage designers to take an earnest stab at this problem.

The complaints here are basically "w.o.t. is not usable", but that's basically what the author said. He therefore also indicated this is as much a design problem as anything else. That's a useful insight we shouldn't dismiss, at least not until some thoughtful, imaginative designers have actually taken a crack at it.

But that's the problem. Upvoting and approving/moderating are different things. Upvoting is a subjective exercise, whereby you signal substantive agreement. Approving/moderating is an objective exercise, whereby you signal that a comment meets minimal community standards of tone and non-triviality. Conflating those will inhibit dissenting opinion.

That said, the direction you're implying might be an improvement. Rather than a separate Pending Comments list, mod-level users would be able to see pending comments in the context of the parent item/tree, but with some kind of adornment or different color. Pending comments will also have a 'tolerable'/'civil'/'endorse' link next to it, but no up/down vote buttons. Only after it's been deemed tolerable enough, will a pending comment become live/approved and have up/down buttons.

Facebook can afford not to provide an better user experience because it has no competition. Should Google Plus one day threaten Facebook's usage, Facebook may pull this design out of it's archives.

Until then, they will provide the minimal user experience that keeps them on top of the hill with as much ad inventory as possible.

I feel my previous comment [1] on the design of this feature is still valid. The word "endorse" carries the wrong connotations and increases the risk of subjectivity and groupthink. A better link label might be "tolerable".

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7449597

The word "endorse" mischaracterizes the aims of this program, and counter-productively provokes groupthink. Renaming the "endorse" link to "tolerable" (where it becomes a kind of flag) would go a long way to mitigating that risk.

Details in my comment on "Coming Soon...": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7449597