cables are almost never exclusive, the economics just make more sense if you have partners because adding extra capacity before you start laying cable has a very low marginal cost
I assume virology labs are not randomly distributed across the country, e.g. there could be many reasons why a lab studying coronaviruses might be located in close proximity to an area with a high risk of outbreak.
Neat, I'd never seen outpost generator before, quite useful. I wish it were possible to generate blueprints directly from mods so stuff like that could be directly integrated into the game.
This is super cool, but like the other deepmind projects it's a bit frustrating. I've got nothing against "we did something hard with AI and it worked well", but would greatly prefer it to be followed with "... and we're making this available as something you can use too!"
Are there any good examples of these minimal lisps which include typechecking? I'd personally like to learn more about incorporating that aspect, but it seems fairly uncommon.
You would have a hard time naming a AAA game which doesn't have a huge chunk of its actual gameplay logic in a scripting language (or something like Unreal blueprints). There's a huge amount of value in using different tools for the performance-critical parts vs the rest.
Legitimate question: are the differences in standard of living something you could buy somewhere else if you had 2x or 3x the total income? Or is it more intangible?
But... why are you excluding the top 5% of companies? That seems like it's precisely the answer to this question, there are several large companies with engineers in Berlin that pay in this range. levels.fyi shows numerous data points of L5 engineers at Amazon's Berlin office getting
~€110,000 for example.
one of the main reasons why I work at Facebook (4 years now) is because I genuinely like the product, and I know lots of people who it brings legitimate value to. Obviously we have made lots of mistakes and bad decisions -- nobody can deny that -- but I think we get a hard time on HN because the core demographic group here (young affluent american males) is one who sees basically no benefit to the product, so they're weighing those harms against nothing. If you talk to some people who genuinely use and love the product (who do exist!), you'll get a different perspective.
If you legitimately agree with Bernie Sanders that "billionaires should not exist" (an increasingly mainstream idea), it seems unsurprising that you would get this outcome. If someone thinks smoking is killing people and you say "but actually it's good!", it's hard to see what kind of intellectually stimulating and complex conversation could be had from there.
It's more that some tracking is important to result quality. For example, if I search for "eclipse" on Google, I get 5 results about the IDE, but my wife gets local maps & youtube videos about eclipses.
Also the personality type matrix of people who chose to work from home is different from the general population -- of course those people have higher wfh productivity. My wife is the most extroverted person I've ever met, so she's going to have a significantly harder time with remote work than someone who self-selected into it.
It can be quite hard to come to game development from a web programming background, because "good architecture" for a React app means a set of best practices (e.g. one way data flow, immutability, discrete mutations and events) which don't always cleanly map over to a realtime environment. It might be good to talk about mapping over concepts you're already familiar with.
Huh, I've always found Unity orders of magnitude better than something like Unreal, never seen more than 10 seconds to compile which seems quite reasonable to me.
(You do need to turn off Auto Refresh though, no idea why they think having that setting enabled by default is a good idea.)
What exactly are the limitations that prevent this game from working in Firefox to the point where they need a "please download Chrome" banner? Just curious, I thought WebAssembly and WebGL were pretty competitive these days.
I agree with this for really large codebases, but I think you can get a surprising amount done before your program becomes "non-trivial" using a good dynamic language. For example, the website you are writing this comment on has been perfectly maintainable in lisp without any static typing for the past 15 years.
I suggest you try and talk to some people who actually get positive value out of Facebook for an alternate perspective. The HN audience (mostly young, nerdy white men) have always been one of the worst demographics for social networking products, and they might give you the impression that it's strictly bad for society because they don't personally derive any benefit from it. But if you step outside of that group, you will find there are actually a lot of people whose lives are enriched by social products.
Incidentally, this is why Google+ failed -- it was a social network marketed to the kind of people that hate social networking :)
Lisp programmers realized in the 70s that having an artificial division between code and data was frequently problematic, hopefully other languages continue to catch on as well :)
I started learning rust as a quarantine project, and my <5000 line project takes ~10 seconds to do an incremental development build and 1-2 seconds to typecheck
"Type-sensitive" code is encouraged when using the functional style, where you treat objects as dumb "bags of data" that have no inherent functionality of their own. It's still discouraged when following an object-oriented "smart objects" pattern.
I would reword it as "the primary representation is also a data structure literal in the language itself". I think "literal" is basically what they mean by "primitive type", i.e. there is first-class syntax to create the structure.
Another example of a homoiconic language is XSLT, where the syntax of the language is based on XML, but it also has XML literals.
I conduct this style of interviews. It's easy to complain, but much hard to propose better options. Most alternative hiring proposals do not meet the fundamental criteria of Big 4 hiring: they must reject approximately 99% of applicants while consuming an average of two hours of engineer-time per candidate.