I had this in an interview (back '96). Came up with a linear time constant space solution: create a new node, push it on the front, reverse the list, check if the 1st node is the same one you pushed, if so it has a loop, otherwise it doesn't. The downside is you need to reverse again to get the original list.
Another answer is to mark nodes using the low bits of the next pointer. Also linear time, but also requiring clean up. I can see how not knowing c would cause people to think this question was somewhat unfair, but I didn't see it that way.
This is a far better 'culture' document then the Airbnb don't fuck up the culture memo.
It speaks to an important and specific norm for programmers. Plus, it doesn't read like the setup for a Greek tragedy, where hubris and self fulfilling prophecy loom large.
6.002 midterm at MIT in 91 had a problem trivial to solve with a Laplace transform ... Actually it had a couple. Of course Laplace transforms would be taught in the second half. The few students who already knew the transform or somehow knew to read, ahead did well. I spent 20 minutes on one problem solving the differential equations from scratch without the damn transform. I felt sorry for those who weren't taking it as a freshman (it was pass/fail for all classes your first year at MIT).
That guy was a useless jerk. (As a teacher.) I did have professors that were useful jerks ... Difficult homework every single class with spot on directed feedback by the very next class. Unfortunately teaching well at a research university is just a mark of being eccentric. It seems to be negatively correlated with getting tenure. The 'useful jerk' already had tenure. He was mean, but an awesome teacher.
I use the mailbox iPhone app. The killer feature for me is that I can snooze an email. It's close to ideal for me. This ability to show multiple inboxes on the desktop might be an interesting tool to add visibility to something on another list.
That specific premise is false. An alternate use case does not provide a -meaningful- floor for any store of value. Tulips still have an alternate use case.
I'd claim Krugman is arguing against cryptocurrency in general rather than Bitcoin specifically.
The affordances provided cryptocurrency are new. It's a fair bet that will provide value.
How many factors currently contributing to the value of the US dollar were in place within the first decade of its existence?
I'd also claim the libertarian hopes for cryptocurrency are overblown, though they are definitely contributing to its current level interest.
Ack ... I'm largely ignorant of the details of go other than its original positioning. Do the semantics of go constrain gc implementation in such a way that it precludes low latency? Or is it just not a focus of the implementors?
It is a systems language. The competitors are c, c++, go, and D. Within Microsoft it's just c and c++. Competition with Java is irrelevant, c# already occupies that space. Microsoft has enough need and scale that a systems language that picks up internal use is justified. The use case is making platforms, not crossing them.
If I understand correctly the independent third party is only needed in a dispute. If the buyer and seller are happy then completing the transaction does not require action by anyone else.
This delays payment until 2 of the three parties sign off. From the buyer's point if view that is reversibility. From the sellers point of view this is a delay in getting paid.
The top dev ladder rung is Technical Fellow (promotion from distinguished engineer.) Except for Dave Cutler, who is a 'senior technical fellow' ... which is the exact same level with a different name.
Antonio Damasio is a neuroscientist. He has a theory of consciousness explained in a book called the feeling of what happens. The somatic marker hypothesis is a bit more than 'it emerges from neural activity' At the very minimum the book debunks a good number of otherwise plausible sounding theories. Damasio in that book also does a fantastic job of removing any mysticism from the exercise ... He's trying to explain what each of us recognize as conciousness in other animals. E.g. Many people think their dogs are concious without also holding mystical beliefs.
Ambiguity is something a programmer needs to deal with at work. Riddles are not. Open ended questions are exactly what you want to use to evaluate someone.
Riddles fail because there is an expected answer, not because the form of the question is ambiguous.
Some coding questions as asked in interviews are actually riddles in practice because the interviewer is unskilled. Those 'coding questions' are worse than the obviously bad riddles because it is harder to tell that the feedback is slanted.
It is 'passive' from google's point of view. You are neither producing marketing signals, nor frequent marketing opportunities. It is all utility to the user and lost opportunity to G+.
Does xbmc stream to an Xbox? Or is the name unrelated to the game device? It doesn't really say. The article seems to argue i should switch from my current windows media center then goes on to ask which half of what it already does do I want to keep?
By far the thing of most concern for me would be the channel guide, and that is not addressed here.
While these 'regular expressions' are unreadable, on the plus side they don't ensure O(n) runtime. There should be an anti-Turing award for their creation.
In the long run, different people reap the benefits. I don't see his proposed solution as practical, but denying the problem won't make it disappear. My understanding of the thesis is that large groups of people will be left with only obsolete marketable skills in the not distant future: 5-10 years. I think a historical study of what large populations without work does to society does not argue for optimism about that trend.
[edited because I should know better than to post from my phone as I'm getting off the bus.]