Interesting - how does this work? Do you use some kind of search API to search news sites and validate whether the condition has been satisfied?

yeah -- it takes a little work to kind of get things to work consistently and get it exactly right, but it's information gathering + a validator to see whether the condition has been met.

The one topic that you left out was the online ads business!

I'm sure there are many Indians on HN, but they probably reside somewhere in the US.

They are asleep.

Exactly, I was surprised by the lack of outrage at this.

hahaha, sneaky :)

Really cool. A potential use I can see for this is to help people go from raw data to visuals really quickly. I'm guessing that's the intended use.

I wonder how your extension will handle scenarios with unclean data, however. What if the state labels were irregular?

Thank you for your feedback, appreciate it! yes - for simple, we can call it Pinterest for data stories.

I haven't thought about that problem of unclean data yet, right now as prototype, the map module drops the unmatched entry after trying to identifying it as state (full or short names), county names, zip code, etc. In the future, editing distance might help improve matching.

Any system will have people who aren't performing well, and some fraction of those people will be tempted to cheat. Cheating in this case doesn't provide any indication that the system is broken.

I'm currently interviewing for a mix of tech lead and equivalent staff engineering roles that more "individual contributor" focused

The ones that skew towards heads down work ask a lot of LC questions (the kind cheated on in the article).

These are that you can find the exact solution for in the time it takes you to read the question out loud for the interviewer...

-

Meanwhile ones that skew towards leadership are asking questions that you can't cheat nearly as easily on.

Having in-depth conversations with technically knowledgeable people, sure you could maybe you could get some sort of teleprompter, but the breadth and depth of knowledge being asked means you'd be hard pressed to keep up if you didn't already know the domain pretty well.

There's also a greater focus on talking about yourself, like things you've done for example. Now you can borrow someone's story, but again, it's many many times harder to deliver it convincingly than it is to deliver a LC answer that has a known optimal solution that you're already expected to follow near verbatim.

-

The difference is simple, the amount of resources you're willing to put into testing.

Places asking LC questions are doing so as a cheap filter.

Places assigning a high ranking engineer to talk to you are making an investment.

I understand the dilemma a few companies in tech face, like FAANG. There's so much demand they can't afford that in-depth approach for everyone.

But I do see a problem with how systemic the cheap filter approach has gotten. So many companies hurting for applications in the pipeline are putting up silly hoops that ironically seem to favor people who aren't that technically experienced.

I mean who's going to do better on a LC Hard with dynamic programming, the person who's spending 8 hours a day at work writing code, mentoring, doing code reviews, meeting stakeholders, etc... or the fresh grad who spends 8 hours a day running through your company's question list on LC?

I recently saw a post on Blind about a company dealing with a bad hire... they hired a CS PhD as a Senior dev only to find they were executing at the level of a Junior. Want to venture a guess as to how they managed that?

I got to the second last paragraph before I realized LC = leet code.

I mentioned it's the type of question in the article since Leetcode won't mean much either to some people

Now you're not

This is because it's question. Any help?

Huffpost.com has been banned since 2013. You might have better luck submitting news sources that publish less clickbait. (And don't bother creating new accounts, it just makes it look like you're creating sockpuppets.)

It's not clear what your question is asking.

I think their investment in DARPA has a positive externality for society. If we account for this externality, perhaps taxpayers enjoy a positive ROI?

This is a broad generalisation without supporting evidence - not sure if this helps improve the quality of the discussion. Can you substantiate your statement further?

There's research that shows woke signalling is highly correlated with both psychopathic traits and narcissistic traits.

The correlation is around 0.3-0.5.

That's evidence that it's used actively as a tool to gain either social status or something else.

The study you pointed to indicates that these psychopathic/narcissistic traits apply to virtuous victimhood signalers on both the woke ("Recognize your privilege") and the anti-woke ("The real racists are all on the left") side of thing.

Do you happen to have a link to that research handy?