Frontend software engineer. Latency management is included in front-end engineer's job (because most of the time, it's Javascript's fault), so debugging something like this would not fall outside of the job description. My interviewer was also a frontend software engineer. Both of us ended up doing more general-SWE/TL jobs later on, though (by coincidence, I ended up on the same team as her a year and a half later).
I doubt that they would ask the same question now - for one, most Chinese queries are served out of datacenters in Southeast Asia now (at least when I left; if I believe the Project Dragonfly news I hear about on HN they may be served from inside China), so there's no trans-Pacific cable hop. The Chinese population has also gotten a lot more access to broadband & high-bandwidth mobile connections in the decade since this interview.
Well, partially true. Fat is very energy rich so low fat diets will typically have less calories and calories are basically the only thing you need to worry about when trying to lose weight.
On the flip side protein in particular is very sating, and protein + fat (in the absence of carbs) has a much lower insulin response. So a higher fat diet with protein sources will have an increased satiety.
Calories do count, but hormonal response is a primary factor.
Edit: it's worth noting that a certain amount of fat is absolutely needed and is sating in and of itself.
Personally, I don't think the amount of fat you get (in terms of calories) should be lower than the amount of protein you consume, and should come from better sources excluding refined vegetable oils (which are everywhere). My opinion on this is somewhat based on the relative amounts of fat to protein in sources where you get protein naturally. I also feel that not getting enough fat is a big factor in gallbladder dysfunction and stones.
A lot of my opinions are just from common sense, observation and a lot of reading on relatively recent diet and nutrition shifts, and feel levels/extremes can vary based on general health, metabolic syndrome indicators and outright diabetic progression.
Iunno, if i were a billionaire, the idea of having $50m under nobody’s control but my own that I can take anywhere, anytime, doesn’t exist anywhere else.
I can’t do that with gold. Bank deposits are always available until they aren’t. But Coinbase can’t do this either.
And why would someone put $50m into a highly volatile, unchecked tech, where mediators are mostly known because of their security problems and breaches?
I have carried several kilograms of gold through TSA screening checkpoints a half dozen times. I know that GP pre-edit was talking about $50mm but it is practically quite straightforward and entirely legal to fly domestically in the US with $0.5-1mm in gold. The risk of civil asset forfeiture is another matter but in 6-8 times I have never personally felt at risk from such.
>Let us know how you get it through airport security.
How you get it through what now? Private aircraft don't deal with that. GP did specify "billionaire", and at that level at least fractional ownership in private long distance transportation is not a reach either.
The point is that transporting large amounts of money that can be physically confiscated is a problem, even if it somehow fit into a suitcase.
Debating the logistics of potentially being able to evade some of those difficulties by having even larger sums of money (to afford private airliners or private security, even in times of unrest) and accepting larger risks misses the point.
you're missing the obvious methods, used by the wealthy. and it has the single hallmark, of being the preferred methods - as it is propped by other rich people, also evading taxes.
All of those items can be done pretty trivially without cryptocurrency (with the sort-of exception of Venezuela, but taking money out of the country is not a legal usage in either case).
Except credit card companies don't want to touch porn sites (they have to pay a huge markup and go through other middlemen) or pot companies (who accept cash but it's not digital).
PayPal froze the donations to wikileaks. That's not possible if you donate using Bitcoin.
The corrupt government in Venezuela may deem it illegal but it's not immoral to want to flee the country with your wealth. This is much easier with Bitcoin as you can just remember or write down your seed.
The point is cryptocurrencies does this all better. And your definition of "pretty trivial" is for the most part ignorant.
Your markup/middleman argument pretends that Bitcoin didn't fairly recently have massive fees for transactions - for a while, one's $10/month Pornhub subscription would've cost $40+/month. (Side note: said monthly subscriptions are another challenge here for crypto and porn...)
Cryptocurrency stored on an exchange can be frozen, just like one's PayPal balance can be. Wikileaks takes PayPal (and credit card, bank transfer, checks, etc.) donations currently on their site.
Bitcoin's developers have refused for years to do what's necessary to avoid high fees like that. Luckily there are other cryptocurrencies, like Bitcoin Cash, which consistently have < 1 cent fees.
The infrastructure for automatic payments isn't there yet that's true. There's no reason why it can't be done though. I also have recurring payments for my email service, VPN, VPS and domains which I pay using cryptocurrencies.
To be fair the point of cryptocurrencies isn't to store them on an exchange (although you can) as some of the benefits are then lost.
That Wikileaks take other options doesn't retract from the point that there are clear benefits for them to accept cryptocurrencies.
The long-term value of crypto will likely come from use cases made possible by auditable smart contracts that are administered on decentralized databases and run at perfect fidelity, facilitating the efficient flow of information through multiple types of systems (logistics, finance, etc) at a refresh rate / granularity that will be orders of magnitude faster / more detailed than the current status quo.
In the meantime it'll be fun to say snarky things about shitcoins, no question about it, but the tech does have some pretty exciting potential.
>but the tech does have some pretty exciting potential
And some terrifying consequences for bugs. Or administrative errors with contracts, or non-binding contracts that you'll need a traditional court to sort out anyway.
These smart contracts people keep talking about, maybe one day they'll amount to something, but so far I don't know anyone who uses smart contracts, or who wants to use them, or who even knows what they are or what they do.
The number of Bitcoins that currently exist is still increasing, at about 4% annually. They have an eventual cap (assuming that never gets hard-forked away) but for now they still mint 12.5 new bitcoins every 10 minutes.
The only question is... what cryptocurrency projects have a real cause and use cases? I have yet to meet a person that bought something using a cryptocurrency, expect for another cryptocurrency.
