skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you bring up a good point. I do believe that, especially at large scale organizations with many suborganizations, the situation you describe can occur even more frequently.

At the end of the day, we are all surrounded by different scales of organization, whether it be a small family unit, formal and informal networks, societal organizations and institutions, businesses, etc.

There has to be a balance, because many organizations want flexibility, "democracy", the ability to change direction quickly, autonomy in suborganizations, etc. Yet, this must be balanced with the need for some kind of order against pure chaos or harmful organization actors (for instance). This implies some kind of governance, some kind of "ground rules" if you were, for things to function and be reasonably effective/efficient.

I think this is where organizational culture truly matters. I do think culture can be encouraged, and norms and behaviors modeled, and sometimes even formally enforced, but ultimately the net governance that emerges at scale is a sum of the parts (i.e. the whole is greater). I do not know if, at the kind of organizational scale I'm talking about (many thousands of people or more), it is possible to govern everything with absolute precision and control.

Rather, at scale, one can only model the desired outcomes, norms and behaviors, and/or set policy.
Utimately what the organization is - all its boundaries and suborganizations and networks all the way up and down the scale of an organization - is determined by the sum of those who participate and represent the organization. It does leave holes where those with personal agendas or sociopathic tendencies (for example) may take hold.

By all this, I mean to say that, I do not believe it is just in recesses where sociopaths grow most influential. I believe they grow wherever their influence has meaning and they have power/control.

The only thing that can protect organizations against such behavior ultimately is the collective will of the members of the organization, at all levels of scale. The culture, and members of the organization are the ultimate tool for protecting the organization against such threats.

Even with laws or policies, everything depends on enforcement. Enforcement also depends on culture, in addition to power and control. I believe though, that in the long run, everything depends on what culture allows, and only culture can stop sociopaths from being ultimately successful and protect organizations from such threats.
how to apply?
More fascinating is his website. https://bruno-simon.com/
Interesting scenario.

Can you describe further the context of you sitting at a cafe with a founder?

did you know you were meeting a founder?

Were you there as a friend ?

What was your primary motivation for being there with the person?
We immediately start tripping over philosophical issues though. How is it possible to be confident that a language model is different from thought?

It seems quite possible that a model of thought could be equivalent to a language model and there is circumstantial evidence the two things are equivalent. A lot of people appear to think by reasoning something out with words. People are absolutely persuaded by words that pass a language model check, even if the words don't align to reality.
Have you been applying to "new grad"/"junior SWE"/"SWE engineer I" jobs from other places like LinkedIn and Glassdoor?

Also, if you graduate in the fall (or before), there's no reason to be applying for internship roles.

It might help to have links to working demos for projects listed on your resume.
Again, customers do not need to pay for all cost increases. Businesses are not non-profits. They take costs, and then some. The amount of "and then some" is variable. Cost increases that do not exceed "and then some" do not necessarily need to be paid by customers.

Low margin is not no margin. As long as there is a margin, this remains true for some level of cost increases.

And your example is excessively reductive. Say the $3 company can't actually retain any workers because their pay is so bad. They will not be serving any $3 coffees, so it's not a threat to the $10 coffees. Also, your example prices sure are, uh, interesting and hard not to read in to.
> if the parent follows up on it there's a good chance the child will be medicated.

You say that, but we went through three recommendations over 5 years or so and following doctors visits where we were told initially that it was hard to tell because she was young, and that she might grow out of it, and the doctors did not recommend medication at that time (so we didn't, until on the last one where that diagnosis and recommendation changed based on her age and behavior).

The problem with statements like "there's a good chance" is that it's likely based on your understanding of things and not actual statistics or hard data, and meanwhile I have my understanding of things based on my singular experience (anecdote) that's also not based on hard data, so without any of that data all I'd agree with you on is that sure, some parents might end up with medicated children that don't need it based on a teacher recommendation, but I'm not sure whether it's a "good chance" or not, and unless you have more info you haven't disclosed, I'm not sure whether you know that either.
I’m sure it’s not on the same scale but I wonder what percentage of their profits go to payroll?
There are quite a lot of us actually. See you on online-go.com.
Yes, I guess I'm just saying it probably wouldn't be too hard for them to know whether you would probably like those people as well or if you would swipe on them but not be likely to message them much.

Again, just maybe it's me feeling more and more annoyed at how little control these companies give us to sort/filter our feeds and therefore how much they really can manipulate our experience (for better or worse), with our main semblance of control being leaving the platform.
I kinda liked XQuery, but it seemed to never have got much traction.
I don't get how you can miss this so badly?

Like I clicked expecting a synergy focused neo-textual presentation vis-à-vis the Macintosh

But literally the first line of text my eyes laid on was the explanation, it's cloud "OSX".

Clicking on About made it clear the OSX part was just the look and feel, and so did the Apps page.

And I mean, it also feels like a bit of parody so that'd be ruined by beating you over the head with "*not actual OSX" everywhere on the oage
In my experience, resumes/online applications don't work on their own. Normally I would say lean on your network, but as a new graduate you probably don't have much of one yet (which is fine and normal). Still, the key is to get the ear of a real human being at a given company.

When I was graduating, basically all of my leads came from job fairs. Does your school host those? Does a nearby school host them?

Other ideas:

- Alumni networks

- Professors with industry connections

- Friends from school who interned with companies during previous summers

- Friends from school who graduated last year and have found jobs at companies

- Even extended family members might have a useful connection

To reiterate: automated application portals are notorious for rejecting large swaths of qualified candidates. The only way to get past them is a human being, even one you don't know all that well is fine. I've gotten my foot in doors via friends-of-friends that I've only met once.

Best of luck. I'm sure you'll find a job eventually, there are lots of them out there!
AFAIK the 15-kopek coin existed already during the Russian Empire. The “mid-range” coinage came in multiples of five: 5, 10, 15, 20, 25.
CES 2021: This app transforms your iPhone into an eye-tracker
I mean, IMO the presence of a "soul" is unmeasurable and unfalsifiable. Personally, I usually like to tell people I'm 97% sure GPT-3 isn't sentient. That percentage will undoubtedly go down (for me) as better and better models are created.

As far as the fact that it's based on multiplications, you could make the same argument about humans--after all, we're just wet bags of organic molecules undergoing constant chemical reactions.

I see the point you're making though and definitely agree to a certain extent in the specific context of GPT-3, but I don't think that matmuls fundamentally preclude the possibility of sentience.
I have just the book for you :-)

Buy yourself a copy of; Who Is Fourier?: A Mathematical Adventure (any edition will do) and study it. Check reviews on Amazon and elsewhere. This is a great book written in Manga style which is highly approachable.
I guess I just wish we had a little more agency over how some companies worked, rather than only having the option to either stay or leave.
This is all the wrong attitude and we should be careful. I'm writing yet another market trading bot, and this one implements the fear and greed index (https://money.cnn.com/data/fear-and-greed/).

I explained to a non-technical friend that I was implementing "fear and greed" in my bot as a kind of joke, and he said, "Oh wow you're giving it emotions. It's sentient? That's really cruel to make it fearful. Why would you do that?"

I tried to spend the next ten minutes explaining it was just a series of "if" statements. I'm not sure he really got it -- all he said after was something like "It's amazing programmers can do that now"
When will we have an alternative to OpenAI/GPT-3 that is available without nanny oversight and moralizing from Silicon Valley?

There are tons of great uses of GPT-3 that are prohibited by OpenAI. If I want to generate spicy literotica, why can't I? The blanket ban on adult content is stupid.
That's a good point, but the majority of ivermectin in the US is used as a dewormer. Maybe I'm incorrect here, but I'd say that the principle use of this drug is as a dewormer. It can also be used in other applications, but anti-strongyles and such is the majority use.
Where was the consent?

That's right - it cannot be given.
LPS holds are 72hr. It's the only situation where you can be detained against your will. Unfortunately, many seriously ill people can not get the psychiatric help they need because of how difficult it is to forcibly medicate(in CA, at least) or keep a person beyond 72hr if they improve slightly.

IMHO, the system errors too much on the side of caution when it comes to psychiatric holds and ignores history of repeated hospitalizations.
Thoth, or Hermes Trismegistus.

Something incredibly alluring about his lore.
> Put another way, you could write out on paper the calculations that a chatbot is performing to select what it says.

Sounds like Searle's Chinese room. Or more recently, this scene in Marvel's Loki (1-minute clip: https://youtu.be/ya6Z_eDGPUQ).

What if I could write on paper the calculations a human is performing; is that human no longer a mind, just because they're predictable?

A relevant experiment in testing for Theory of Mind in animals: "the experiment presented chimpanzees with the choice of two experimenters from whom to request food: one who had seen where food was hidden, and one who [visibly, obviously] does not know, and can only guess. They found that the animals failed in most cases to differentially request food from the "knower". By contrast, another experiment found that subordinate chimpanzees were able to use the knowledge state of dominant rival chimpanzees to determine which container of hidden food they approached." -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind#Non-human
Darn, even GNOME jumped on the let's-make-the-UI-flat bandwagon.

To be honest I'm lost for words here: what's pushing this trend to make the actionable items blend with the content in such a confusing way?

I understand modernization but I'd really love to get a UX designer point of view here: what's the problem being tackled away by flattening all the actionable items here? What are we gaining in terms of usability?
At the interview try to act as left leaning and Politically Correct as possible. If you need a summary of what the current hive mind thinks, you can search issues that will have importance. If you have a basic mastery of CS core curriculum like data types and basic algorithms, then the behavioral part will be very important.
At Poll Everywhere we run a few high volume SMS short codes. Somehow somebody texted one of our short codes, which replied to an Uber SMS phone number, which replied to our short code, which replied back to Uber, which replied back to our short code, which replied back to Uber, which replied back to our short code…

After a few days of this we racked up a bill that I think was $10,000’s in SMS fees before we noticed the problem and terminated the loop.

It’s pretty crazy the problems you’ll run into given enough time and scale.
As soon as your news feed becomes too big for you to read all of it and then decide whether to repost anything, the quality of information you propagate is going to fall because of that filtering process.

I avoid this by unfollowing people very frequently. I see one stupid candid or a pout or a food shot, I just unfollow that person.

Same goes for SJW/White Supremacy types. Whether you are OP or a sharer, you get muted/unfollowed.

This is how I use Quora. When I used Facebook five years ago, I used it this way.

Twitter I use only for professional content. Very strictly. I also set the trending country to Namibia, so that I don't even know what they are talking about.

I am less and less active on social media with the passing of days, but a good social media experience can be achieved by strictly filtering normies, politics, food porn, etc.
The issue is that wet bulb temperatures above 35°C aren't hospitable to human life for very long. That's why sauna sessions are limited and frequently punctuated by going into the cold.

Humans radiate a lot of heat, and if we can't dump that waste heat into our environments or take advantage of evaporative cooling, we overheat. Saunas condition people to survive this for longer periods, but they're not something you could make use of in the tropics without any air conditioning, for instance.
Corporations want to make money. They can think long term but not THAT long term. Anyway the bigger risk for us is climate change IMO.
And perhaps most disquieting, the rectification for the SNAFUs was to consolidate these organizations, breaking down the walls that traditionally separated domestic policing from international espionage.

And I can't even say they were wrong. I don't have better answers. The threat model is a porous-border threat.
Speaking of own sites, but did you ever find out what is going on with effbot.org? Somewhat off topic, but I just found your older post & HN has disabled new comments there… I’ve referred to that Tkinter guide so many times. Sad to see it down.
A 100% death rate would look a lot like Bird Box. Probably a society ender.
I mean, are we gonna talk about ‘=‘, ‘==‘, and ‘===‘?
Perhaps we really are in the (clickbait) matrix.

An blog post about a pointless research project aimed at drawing a conclusion that could be drawn from common sense without any research at all.

All of which is a somewhat circular exercise in bad content announcing itself to the world in an ontological sense.
That is seriously impressive workmanship. Do you suppose this is in Sialkot?
It's too late, but lot of CS students do 1-2 internships, and often get a full time offer from one of these 2 offers if done 12-18 months ahead of graduation.
Why Chile?
This is actually a distinction without difference

What you describe is HOW Goog etc... unseated the majors. Namely that those other companies couldn't adjust fast enough to absorb those new and fast growing markets.

While we could argue whether or not FAAMG is great at executing on attempts to follow emerging markets, I think it's indisputable that they have the resources and nibleness to either absorb via acquisition, take significant positions in (via venture funds) or kill any emerging markets that would actually replace their market positions.

I argue that there exist no emerging markets where the top players couldn't collectively come in and replace/kill the new entrants.
Why is this a moral right? The company decides to leverage the users, tools, and ecosystem of Apple to make money so they agree to the terms. What is immoral about that?

Do you do business in a different country, make money, and then criticize the government for "siphoning off a share of the money flowing through their platform"? I'm referring to taxes.
I'm sorry to hear you're feeling discouraged. Jobhunting in software is a roller coaster. The standard advice is to apply to many companies, read Cracking the Code Interview and practice Leetcode, ask any more senior devs or your profs to do mock interviews. If you're having trouble getting that first callback, I think the commonality is you're only going through the school job board - that might not be working, try directly applying.

If you'd like to post your email (a throwaway is fine) I'll email and review your resume, I'm ~10 years into my dev career.
The money supply was rapidly expanded in 2008. That’s 13 years ago and we’ve seen massive asset inflation since.

There is ample reason to think it might still blow up in our faces.
lol by that logic we should be careful in how we trade because we wouldn't want to make "the market" fearful. Also, that link interesting because I've only ever followed the VIX and didn't know about the others in that list.
> And technically only the setting was removed -- you can still customize all that but you'll have to modify the browser itself

You are suggesting that I replace a simple configuration change with familiarizing myself with a very complicated code base, creating a patch, and running a build that on my machine takes multiple hours, then repeat the process for every update? Yeah, I have no idea why more people don't do that.

> I don't know what you mean by "systematically removed" in that way, frequent addition and removal of various features is completely normal for a large project.

Sure. But from my perspective at least, the customisability is decreasing, more features are being removed than added. It used to be that Firefox was a browser built for power users, but it is becoming less so. That was one of it's major advantages over chrome.

I understand the cost of maintaining features, and the tradeoffs involved. The Firefox teams priorities are different than mine, and I understand that. For example, there are many features I would have rather seen worked on rather than redesigning the UI (and I do actually like a lot of the proton design). But I can accept that they have different priorities. But they are also bleeding users, so something is clearly not working for them. And maybe, as the OP suggests it is because of changes
that anger a minority of their users. At some point, the union of many minorities becomes a majority.
The Big Semiconductor Water Problem [video]
If those are your standards, create your own and do whatever you want.
The line is clear. It specifically is ruling on the companies agreeing to Apple's terms for creating their app in the Apple ecosytem. It's not ruling against the end-consumer which is what you are referring to. You're conflating the creator of the app with the users of the app.
Personally I don't see how someone who understands how ML models work could think this way. It's a probabilistic model based on a corpus of text (actually arbitrary numbers representing tokens encountered in text) it's been trained on. It has not capacity to reason or to compare things with some understanding of how the world works, as people do. Any example to the contrary has been hard coded by a person. It's just a math equation, with billions of terms, to pick the best word that satisfies some criteria.

When we see ML models fail spectacularly, it's a reminder they don't understand anything, have no "common sense" they can test an idea against, unless a person explicitly wrote it.

I think it's hard to make a case to people who don't actually understand what an ML model is, which is why I mentioned learning about it in my previous comment. Nobody should believe what I (a random guy on the internet) say at face value, but it's a sophisticated science that's had a lot of unsophisticated folks jump on it and imagine things about it. Go to grad school if you really want to understand and make up your own mind.
The "don't take the lift" suggestion in the screenshot is excellent. This presents a daily challenge that you can feel proud of tracking.

However, I think that this is only because it is reducible to a positive item that would be better served by a todo list: - Take the stairs.

The other ones don't seem like discrete, countable challenges. Rather they're simply part of conscientious behavior. You might as well include "don't spill milk and walk away without cleaning it up" or "don't kick your dog" in there. Unless you had serious problems avoiding those actions, I don't think it's very useful.
Have you seen the questions in a standard tax return? Lots of stuff the govt has to validate - are you blind, do you have dependents, etc.

If you wanted a truly hands off tax return you’d need to revamp a ton of the tax law.
> I could see the usefulness of FB with connecting with friends near & far, sharing, planning, etc.

When I used FB, I used it as a non-professional LinkedIn. Like, networking, but for people outside of your professional network.

Being connected to people who are not so close that you shared your cell number, but still wanted to stay connected.

(Email isn't big where I live)
Unfortunately you are going about your question the wrong way.

Outside of what pg5 user already mentioned, there is probably only 1 more thing you can do.

Employers want problem solvers and people with skills. You may not be able to offer that just yet.

So, you need to instead demonstrate you are worthy of investment. That you are hungry to learn.

That is generally not a quality or a byline on a resume.

Being worthy of investment is to be demonstrated. Think about that.

Its all about behaviors, not skills: Open source contributions, going the extra mile, hustle, and grit.
Why is it simultaneously so hard to hire software engineers and so hard for new ones to find a job?
Brian Clark (September 11 survivor)