Given the current high stock price of FANGs (or should I say MANGs?), is appreciation really that likely? I'm hearing of offers for mid-career engineers with just 500-700K in equity. And that is over 4 years.
The P/E ratio of most FAANG companies is not completely insane, we are not talking about TSLA. I think there are good chances those stocks will continue growing healthily in double-digit territory yoy. They are incredibly high-quality companies with tons of revenues and tons of cash reserves.
Recency bias means that everyone and their mother thinks that the market will go up forever. Meanwhile don't look at cloud stocks and Ark funds since 2021.
Wow ... I want to pull my eyes out now. Is this really some uber critical path in the code or did the author(s) have too much time on their hands/optimizing some other metric (e.g. promotion, proving how smart they are, attempting to get job security). I am also astounded by two things related to documentation .. it is nearly non-existent, and where it exists, seems to provide almost no context to someone other than the original authors.
You posted this for a reason .. would be good to get your thoughts.
edit: adding one more point. I went to a fairly high-ranked university(top-20). We would get graded based on how clear our code was, comments (both for functions and inline comments). This code would get a zero on those metrics.
Hmm... I can't see how the code is unreasonable, given the complexity of the task at hand. Could you tell me what could be improved about this code (code itself, not docs etc)?
That code is older than C++11, let alone C++17. Also, your proposal isn't as efficient, since it calls strlen on construction of string_view (not that cost of parsing command line arguments is going to be measurable).
This is a worthless statement. Do you examine all of your generated machine code to ensure that it generates correct code? Any compiler that you cannot trust to inline 3 for strlen("foo") is not one you should trust to compile anything, let alone modern C++.
> Do you examine all of your generated machine code to ensure that it generates correct code?
(not OP). I examine the output if someone tells me it's slower, or if I care about performance. I did a very rough benchmark which says in this case they're equivalent [0], however that's not necessarily representative of the places it's called in. There's definitely a compile time overhead though [1]. On my current project there's ~20k files. On an 8 core machine (as an example), adding 150ms per file would add 7 minutes onto a clean build (before optimising the builds).
The code is ancient, and Google (like most) sees no value in modernizing old code, particularly for non-revenue-generating product. Furthermore, Google long ago locked themselves into an idiotically anti-RAII coding standard.
So, the example is of bad old code, at a place that enforces bad coding practice. The intent appears to be to suggest this is typical practice, which is not supported.
Google seats at ISO C++, is a major contributor to clang and LLVM, and belongs to the group of companies with largest C++ code in production.
If this what a company with deep roots in C++ world is doing, what are the large majority of "dark matter" software factories doing, specially the sweetshop ones.
A minuscule fraction of the people coding what they call C++ at Google come to the committee meetings. Google's ancient, idiotic prohibition on RAII is not a thing the current attendees, or other employees, have a say about. Many, attending or no, would rather be coding sensibly. And, in any case, the ancient code you present is not how code is being written even at Google today. So, your point is hopelessly muddled.
There are shops where people still write new C++ like it's 2011, or 2003, or 1998, or 1992, or C. There are plenty of shops where people code the best way their current production compiler allows. There are plenty where different people do some of each of those. Vanishingly few shops make an effort to rewrite ancient code according to current best practice.
I guess a sweetshop company is one with Oompa-loompas.
Hey random Internet stranger. Don't feel terrible. I have a CS PhD, work in AI, have a fancy job title and decent resume ..yet, I am not making anywhere close to these crazy numbers. I painted myself into a bad corner and am somehow stuck. I work crazy hours to keep myself up to date so I can get myself unstuck. I think most engineers are not making 300K-500K .. it is a bit like social media .. you just hear about the winners and not the losers. Also, the stock market was up like crazy in the last 2 years .. I think this accounts for some of the insane numbers we are seeing, people retiring, etc. The biggest mistake I made is my job doesn't give me shares/RSUs, etc. It was somewhat obvious that this was a problem but it wasn't terrible until most major tech companies did a x3 in 1 year. This was a 1 time lottery I missed (and I suspect many others did too). Things could have gone the other way too (I graduated from my PhD in 2008 and recall how terrible those days were).
I make... nowhere near 300k-500k. But I got decently lucky with a startup earlier in my career. And a bit later I got some hefty bonuses at another company.
But that hasn't really happened the last, say, 8 years. If I kept hitting that luck, I could have been around 500k/year average total comp. But I didn't and I'm not in the 300k+ club.
Azure is not bad compared to the options. Also, MSFT is throwing a lot of brain power at it (notable systems researchers from MSR). Curious what you consider is better?
most of my bad experience with Azure is the control interface, which is worse than AWS/GCP in every way
random incomprehensible error messages, near constant UI timeouts and terrible UI performance and experience (artifact deployment has been "skipped"? why? no way to know), etc
the Windows VMs are also extremely slow compared to my employer's non-azure VM, with the Azure VMs having double the VCPUs, disk IOPS and RAM (despite having the same "stack" deployed on it)
I suggest you understand the material with as much depth as you can. If you gloss over details early on, it will bite you later on. Are you focusing on DL?
Its a Simple Agreement to Future Equity. It's a fundraising instrument where the investor agrees to give the company money in exchange for some amount of equity to be decided at a future date. It's designed to make it easier for founders to get capital at the early stages without having to negotiate valuation.
The best thing to do is to actually read SAFE templates, they are self-explanatory. Pretty much now these are standard instruments for early-stage investing for everyone, not only YC, so investor or founder you’ll see them a lot.
Prior to the SAFE, a lot of startups raised using convertible debt, which had a bunch of strings attached (convertible notes typically have an interest rate, a cap, and a discount). SAFE was an attempt to make this simpler and more founder friendly.
I'm a new manager. Thanks so much for posting this .. it might be obvious but hits on issues I have faced with my team. I do have a question about the "writing down part". In my org, we do perf evals every 6 months. I do weekly 1-1s with my team members. When I course correct or communicate an expectation during a 1-1, what is an appropriate mechanism to document? Email is a bit byzantine .. most of our comms are on slack.
I'm really happy I was able to help somehow :)
Regarding to "writing down part", I follow a strict stature to my 1-1s, which required the direct report and the manager to write down all the points and expectations, this help to reflect every week.
Here you can find my template with some instructions: https://github.com/puemos/templates/blob/main/management/1on...
Keep a separate document with your report that you update in your 1:1s. Your report can also note questions, thoughts, etc. in this document that they want to discuss, for when you next meet.
Have one section for weekly now and one for goal setting.
I pay for a bunch of google services (Google One, YouTube premium) and for the life of me, have not been able to get my country changed. After some time with tech support (was shocked I was able to get someone), the conclusion was to use the play store ON AN ANDROID DEVICE to try to change my country. Quite strange if you use google services without an android device. It doesn't matter if I'm an edge case. They need to support their customer.
I was an early user of coinbase. I only bought a fraction of a coin because of Paul Graham and YC's reputation. Well .. I was wrong. I was not an active trader. It seems they have closed by account and liquidated the btc within (if there were actually btc in my name). I am deeply disappointed that they don't have a telephone number I can call to help figure out the situation. Pretty disappointed.
Coinbase customer service has always been tragic. I remember my BTC being locked up until I could "verify" my identity by submitting a photo of my passport, but their site kept glitching out and zero response from customer service. This went on for months.
Pulled all my coins out and will never use this scummy product again.
Eh, maybe a month ago I found a Coinbase account from 2013 that I had forgotten about, and it still had everything in it. Your story makes no sense. Coinbase support has always been pretty good for every problem I've ever had. Why talk to someone on the phone when you can click a button and have a live chat with a support agent instantly?
I accidentally sent a wire from my business account instead of my personal account into coinbase. Since my account wasn't verified to be a business account they contacted me, sent the money back and reimbursed me the $30 wire fee. I found the customer service to be great.
I've been trading crypto for a while and exchanges are as sketchy as it gets. Sometimes, you have anecdotal experiences that bubble up on the internet but i truly believe coinbase is the most trust-worthy exchange.
I've needed support maybe four times in my 8 or so years using them, and each time they've resolved my problem quickly.
The complaints I've seen about Coinbase support are usually people who withdraw coins to the wrong address or something and are upset that Coinbase won't reimburse them for their own fuckups.
I have had several cryptocurrency exchanges straight up steal money from me and then ghost me. Coinbase has been a pleasure to work with relative to everything else in the crypto space.
Not a lot, I think I had like 10 dollars in there, which is why I forgot about it, and it was up to a couple thousand. I did randomly find a few BTC in a paper wallet when cleaning out my office a couple years ago, that was fun.
As other people have alluded to, this might be California "escheating" you out of the account if you haven't logged in for a couple years (in which case Coinbase doesn't have a say in it). You should look into what's in California's unclaimed property registry: https://www.sco.ca.gov/upd_msg.html
