I work remotely, and I use Slack to keep an open dialog with my team. I used HipChat before that. They both have their upsides for this use case, but I think that it's basically a great tool for what I'm doing. I can easily see how wide use of Slack at a large company could get overwhelming quickly, but that's not so much Slack's fault (HipChat would do the same thing) as much as a general probelm of communication.
A coworker of mine used to ask job candidates (usually folks with PhDs) with HMMs on their CV "what's hidden in a hidden markov model". Lots of people couldn't answer that question.
Perhaps. The TSA is obviously a big problem for American airports. I'm just saying that I can't think of a major airport that I've used and felt like it was a good experience, and the major airports I've been in outside of the US have not been substantially better, with the large and notable exception of the [lack of] TSA presence.
What I'm taking issue with is the description of VSC as "changing the way we code on Unix/Linux". Given your interpretation, Atom and SublimeText and other tools predate VSC and fill much the same role. So I don't see VSC as being transformative in that way. That's not to say it might not be a nice tool, but it's not a revolution either.
Agreed. I don't see anything in VSCode that's not present in any of the vast array of alternatives. But then again, I live in IntelliJ and Emacs land. I don't mind Atom but don't really use it for anything.
Light Table might deserve the term "transformative", but I didn't find it usable enough to rely on.
Really? VSCode has already transformed the way code was written on Unix/Linux? I beg to differ. 10 years ago (when I discovered Eclipse, not sure when it was originally released), Eclipse was a staggering leap forward for Java programming. I'm no Eclipse fan, but I don't think that VSCode has already changed the world in the way that Eclipse did, and certainly not in its short lifespan.
I wonder if maybe instead of asking people to code on the fly, it would make more sense to ask people to review, analyze, and explain some existing code.
Imagine practicing a scale on the guitar. You could just repeat the scale over and over, but you could also add rhythmic variation, or play two notes up and one note down. Based on the article, it doesn't seem like moving the goalposts (ie, fret spacing) is the critical point, it's just that you don't want to just blindly do the same thing over and over and hope to get better.
+1 for a Chuck Traeger reference on HN. I'm also a double bassist. Agreed about instrument modifications. It's common in the bass world for a big-sounding instrument to be described as a "cannon". That doesn't speak much for having a singing tone! Maybe in the world of violins and cellos that's more important, though.
I'm no anti-government activist (far from it), and in general, I think safety regulations are a good idea. But I'm having a hard time getting worked up over this. Are the sort of train accidents that this technology would prevent really so frequent or devastating that we should stop everything and fix it? Especially compared to, say, guns, nutrition, pollution, etc? I mean, I'm all for tackling low hanging fruit and making things safer, but I'm not sure how much effort should go into this compared to other safety issues.
I worked at Amazon for a while, and I was in a number of meetings with a number of senior executives, and I heard them ask, "What's better for the customer?". This move makes me think they've gotten out of the habit of asking that question.
I don't think the author makes a good case for the problem with, for example, noun-verbers, other than that they aren't very OO. If OO means putting lots and lots of state into objects, then I'm happy to be the lunatic fringe.
I like my objects as a unit of code organization and my value objects as simply that - an immutable representation of a value.
I have a 2014 Jetta TDI, and the thing I'm wondering is what the cost of the fix will be - not to me in dollars, since it would be covered by the recall - but rather, will this affect my fuel economy or performance in some other way? I'm just trying to figure out why they don't have the cars running in this lower-emissions mode all the time.
That quote addresses a separate (but very real) question. Issues of diversity in hiring and promotion are really important, and clearly affect lots of companies. I agree that Amazon should release those numbers, and I would not be surprised if Amazon would come up lacking here. But to single Amazon out based on this anecdote is unfair.
A coworker of mine at Amazon was diagnosed with cancer, and as far as I can tell, he was treated with the utmost respect and decency. His team and managers made a lot of accommodation for him while he underwent treatment. Unfortunately, he eventually passed away - to my knowledge, he was still employed to the very end (I moved away and left the company for other reasons, but many of my friends/coworkers stayed and are still there today).
So, I have an anecdote, and this story is an anecdote. I'm not saying that my friend's story offsets the story here (especially because I wasn't the cancer patient in either case). Let's slow down before we draw too many conclusions from either one.