mga226

I didn't realize the comment I was responding to was from the OP. I really am sorry if I came off as harsh, but I stand by my comment.

I hope you're trolling.

If not: I think you'll find find the HN community doesn't react well to either stealing content or complaining about the (quite reasonable, in this case) cost of people's products.

Anyone else just skim the title and then get disappointed when it didn't actually relate to homemade booze?

Although there's a lot more in-depth, actionable information out there, this blog post by Amy Hoy seems tailor-made to your question:

http://unicornfree.com/2013/how-do-you-create-a-product-peop...

> More proof all religions are crap.

I don't see how that follows.

- An atheist.

Genuinely interested in people's opinions:

1. Is this (a) an ad hominem attack on paleo's scientific legitimacy, or (b) an attempt to save the paleo community from the damaging effects of association with misogyny and racism?

2. Is the author claiming that a paleo lifestyle is intrinsically bigoted, or that some paleos are bigots?

Separately, I'm not sure I understand the "cultural appropriation" aspect that constitutes the entirety of the racism charge, can anyone clarify this for me?

Tiny note, I see a typo: 'dasboard' !== 'dashboard'

Fair point, but I'll just point out that sunglasses are cross-platform and work on your TV, iPhone, iPad etc in addition to your laptop.

I've been using the item you linked to for about a year. I try to wear them if I'm using my computer or watching TV within 2 hours of bedtime.

My anecdotal experience is that they do something to help me get to sleep quicker and sleep sounder. Sometimes I forget or take them off for some reason, and then I definitely have a harder time getting to sleep.

Is it placebo? I guess I'd have no way of knowing...

2 additional comments:

1. I didn't anticipate this, but should have. Yellow lenses will make yellow things difficult to see. If a website uses yellow-shifted colors on a white background, certain elements might practically disappear when you have the glasses on.

2. You will look ridiculous wearing the things. Maybe you don't care. I'm slightly ashamed to admit that I do care, and am considering buying these to remedy the situation:

http://www.amazon.com/Blocking-Driving-Wayfarers-Sunglasses-...

Congratulations, by the way, on your great results!

Not to belabour the point, but I disagree. People who "have this mindset" probably appreciate this distinction better than most. It's just a domain-specific shorthand use of the word "carb."

"Carbs" in this context is referring to foods that have a high carbohydrate content, like potatoes, yams, bread, pasta, and to a lesser extent things like carrots, beets, parsnips etc. Foods to avoid if trying to keep carbohydrate intake below 20-50, as these diets typically require.

It doesn't refer to cruciferous/fibrous veggies, as well as things summer squash, even though they are almost entire carbs, because the carb content per serving in these foods is quite low - low enough that you can probably eat as much of them as you like and still be within the prescribed range.

See this submission from yesterday for your answer.

https://raddevelopment.io/blog/want-to-ask-a-developer-how-m...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8435046

This cuts both ways.

> Looking back, I can’t believe I jumped in knowing so little.

I also have this feeling about my first few client projects, and it was to my detriment. The fact that I was technically able to deliver something to spec convinced me that I knew what I was doing. There have been times when I've wished someone had told me back then: stop just making things, and learn how to code.

Fair enough, but I feel I should clarify my comment.

I'm suggesting that if you feel the interview process is flawed even from the company's standpoint (i.e. not screening for the appropriate skills) your best approach might be to reverse engineer the interview (i.e. get better at answering the questions, instead of actually developing the [perhaps irrelevant] skills being screened for).

The Tardos book that I think you're referring to is a $100+, 850 page CS textbook with the goal of making you an expert on algorithm design. The book I suggested costs $30 at is focused on a specific goal of getting through the interview.

I'll grant, however, that there may be better resources for this (and I'd be very curious to hear what others think those are).

An alternative view on this, which may seem cynical but which I find empowering:

In their best form, these types of questions are a litmus test for whether you have a certain type of background. When they fail it's because they test for skills not required by the job. It's fashionable to complain about this, but it seems to me to be more practical and useful to just get better at answering these sorts of questions. Leveling up from "terrible" to "adequate" at this will take less time than you think, and due to the craigslist penis effect[1] will put you way ahead of the game.

Easy resource to get started: https://www.interviewcake.com/

This book is pretty well regarded: http://www.amazon.com/Cracking-Coding-Interview-Programming-...

Btw, anyone with better starting places for this, please jump in.

[1] http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/the-craigslist-pen...

EDIT: formatting

In my experience, coffee shops and the like are too loud, and if they aren't you won't feel comfortable speaking in your "interview voice". If you have a coffee shop with outdoor seating, that can work.

I have done phone interviews literally walking about the neighborhood near my office. This has the added benefit that you supposedly speak with more confidence and authority when standing up and walking.

Had to Google "Garanimals", but yeah. I'd imagined getting a little geekier about the details, along the lines of "Take 2 lbs from food list A, 1 lb from food list B, 1.5 lb from food list C..." but I may be falling prey to the very thing I'm criticizing.

I disagree on one point: this sounds delicious for breakfast.

Very interesting, and sounds delicious.

Probably, and to take it a step further, people who are already on diets of mostly processed foods could even see improvements from switching to 100% soylent, which I suspect underlies a lot of the "I went soylent and my blood work improved and I've never felt better!" reports.

With products like this, the concern is always that we "don't know what we don't know" about human nutrition. Our mechanical understanding of how nutrients do what they do is in its infancy, and human metabolism is mind-bogglingly complicated. This is the thinking behind the (pretty good, in my opinion) advice to "eat real food."

I've been toying with the idea of developing a "real food soylent" -- an easy-to-prepare-in-bulk stew or chili, with a base of real-food ingredient options that can be interchanged based on season, availability, and taste. The idea would be to develop a real food framework that could (in theory) constitute once's entire diet. I think of this idea as Soylent minus the hubris.

I wasn't really asking a question about my health. I was more interested the methodological differences that result in very similar numbers of drinks per day (2 vs 3) being considered healthy (not just acceptable but desirable) or dangerously high, respectively.

The WHO defines 3 drinks/day for men and 2 for women as "high intake." Meanwhile among those who recommend daily alcohol intake for health, the typical recommendation is 2 drinks/day for men and 1 for women - a difference of 1 drink.

Does anyone have any insight on this small apparent difference between "healthy person" and "drunkard"?

I tried something like this a while ago. Never really took, but might be worth another look. Thanks for the tip.

To be fair, this is an entirely retrospective analysis. I'd never thought about it until today.

It's interesting to think about the different ways I use tabs and how they might be better served. For example, I will often open a new tab to create a sort of "checkpoint", resulting in 5 tabs that represent different points in time in a browsing session. Other times I will open 5 pages that are analogous to each other in order to compare (for example, 5 similar products on Amazon). Other times it's a method of "forking" a browsing session into several different paths, while keeping the parent node in its own tab.

Not really proposing solutions here, but it does make tabs look a bit clunky.

Side note: For the last few months, I've been using a Chrome plugin that prevents me from opening more than a predetermined number of tabs at a time. Otherwise I just end up with 45 tabs open.

If you scroll down, a fixed position bar slides down with the following "alternate title"(?):

The 10,000 Hour Rule is Wrong and Perpetuates a Cruel Myth

The <title> tag reads thusly:

Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 Hour Rule for deliberate practice is wrong: Genes for music, IQ, drawing ability, and other skills.

> eat foot which is less than maximally palatable to me

I'm embarrassed to admit that I spent several minutes trying to make sense of this comment before realizing you almost certainly meant "eat food..."

Agreed. Where do you live that this is typical?

Totally agree with this, although it never occurred to me to suspect the sites are gamed. Rather, people making what they deserve don't futz around on salary sites.

In my (totally anecdotal) experience Glassdoor undervalues by >=20% even at the same company.