This was a person they wanted to let go and needed an excuse to get rid of that would save them severance and lawsuits, I'd wager.
I've been experimenting with AI trying to understand its strengths and weaknesses better.There are certain lines of prompting that will result in heavily censored responses. They are quite obvious, and one could reasonably argue that it is a good idea to do so, but some of it seems rather arbitrary. It makes me wonder how much censoring is happening in the major AI tools that isn't obvious.What...
Who would want such a thing exposed?
How many Trump voters care about the details of JD Vance enough to change their vote (zero)?
Why has Zuck publicly shifted from strong anti-Trump positioning to neutral or mildly pro-Trump?
The Razor only works when you use it.
Robust systems minimize fault points. Efficient systems come at the cost of robustness, and vice versa given a fixed definition of what is being conserved, i.e. costs or energy.
For example, a four cylinder engine that gets 15mpg will have a longer life than one that gets 30mpg, given the same cost.
By biasing work income towards men it gives women a larger selection of men to choose from to start families with while they are fertile. It also incents them to move sooner rather than work their own career longer to achieve their lifestyle goals, which conflicts with their fertility timeline.
It's sad seeing my older female friends reaching the end of their fertility and realizing they don't want to live lives without children and families, but being at a disadvantage in the relationship market because the men they consider to be at their level are seeking younger women.
"Woke-ism" is looking more and more like the inversion of reality. It is the denial of fundamental realities in the service of highly questionable ideals.
In fact the ideals of "woke-ism" are so questionable that it only survives because they aren't allowed to be questioned.
It takes an engineer to build a bridge that will barely stand.
A second of life beyond the warranty period is profit that the manufacturer can hold on to rather than give to the consumer. With microprocessors and new materials you can cut the edge closer and closer. Who cares if you destroy the brand's reputation, the executives and PE will be gone before that matters.
If electricity was cheap it would give people inducements to use electric vehicles and appliances. It would be a market driven transition to these things instead of a policy driven one, which is doomed to fail as soon as the subsidies end.
Some of the dumb enviromental laws didn't help either. It could be pretty hard to clear trees from a legal perspective, which made maintenance more expensive and time consuming, leading to grid degradation.
But thanks to the policies we're now on our way down. Human degradation is the norm here in our cities. Take a walk through any of California's major city downtowns. They're broken. The suburbs can still sort of pretend it's all fine though.
Don't say California voted for this, because in fact California has voted against the worst of these policies when they had the chance, only to be overturned by judges. Prop 187, which excluded undocumented people from the public benefits system is a prime example. Californians, probably wisely, decided they didn't want to create an incentive system for undocumented persons to come, and federal courts overturned it. It was one of many moves that changed the face of California and led us into a general decline.
Now entire nations have taken to non-prosecution and even incentivization of extra-legal immigration that they have not proven ready to absorb, including the USA itself. UK is now experiencing some political turmoil around unrestricted immigration, as are many other European countries (note that unrestricted immigration is most harmful to marginalized communities including POC, LGTBQ, and women).
So if the UK isn't getting as many blackouts as California is now, you just give need to give it a little more time. /rant
In current year California I experience them on a regular enough basis that they are an genuine annoyance, especially because they are most common in the high heat of Summer. It's bad enough that I have invested in backup batteries for my home so I don't lose my refridgerated food and other essentials.
One can blame PG&E, Wall Street, whomever, and they certainly bear fault, but what's changed is the Federal and California energy policy. They shut down the nuclear pathway and pushed "renewables". It became a religious issue in which simply questioning the notion that we can derive all our energy needs from "clean energy" makes you a bad person.
So now California has extremely expensive energy and poor reliability. It's a mess. But you don't live in California so it's OK right, no, not really, California is where they prototype these policies and you can see them being pushed to other countries and the rest of the US.
It really comes down to the old saw that doing dumb things is ultimately bad for you, no matter how good the intentions. Now we're in the retcon phase of this process where the apologists and beneficiaries of these policies try to gaslight us into believing that it was always this bad, and that things are actually getting better instead of worse.
1) a native and active interest in computing 2) good english 3) good (enough) social skills
A good software team is built like a good NBA team:
1) a limited number of exceptional performance contributors, not many of these, by definition. Right tail of the normal curve. 2) Good support players with specific skills and the personality to allow your superstars to maximize their potential.
Everyone seems to be looking for 1) in the interview process because that's the gold, but 2) are extremely important to get 1) in the door and working at optimal.
Finally, you need to avoid
3) frictional team members, i.e. negative work. These are people who inject drama into the team process that does not contribute to outcome. A passionate team member who takes hard stances at times is a good thing, even if they're not always correct, because they can head off a bad outcome early in the process. However, someone who just causes drama and turmoil, or even simply breaks the team flow state, is also a big problem.
A team can easily be spoiled by 3) even when you have the perfect superstar and supporting cast because the focus turns from the product to the emotional drama, which is a huge drain.
This leads to a tangential, but important point, the current hiring mandates for modern practice are potentially catastrophic for software development teams. Inserting people onto a team who become 3) will kill a product and drive away your highest value contributors. Superstars in this field don't want drama, they tend to be introverts who are happiest quietly working on their own.
It then follows that meeting modern day hiring protocols often means pushing the equity component into the soft skills side of the company, which means your hiring pool for marketing, hr, project management is reduced to fulfill various hiring mandates. This leaves a lot of experienced, valuable people, who understand good software development because they've done it, on the sidelines because they have the wrong physical characteristics, e.g. the 60 year old who is pushed out of the tech side because of an outdated skill set would probably make an excellent project manager because they understand the SDLC from a technical and personal perspective. Who better to mentor young developers?
But those roles are often going to young college graduates who don't have that experience and just end up glamourized secretaries because they don't have the formative passion for the field.
The NBA superstar/support model works in software development. It's the only thing that creates high quality, high impact outcomes historically. It's the desire to reconfigure the schema into a social change experiment via mandated hiring that causes the complications.
The beings who built the cathedrals had methods and technologies of amazing power that we know virtually nothing about. They are artifacts of something that is now, presumably, gone.
The Covid episode was a particularly brutal time during which some people, like Albini, used their platforms to bully and abuse people who had concerns about the covid vaccine. Albini was one of them.
Thrombosis is a known side effect of the covid vaccines and it can cause heart attacks. If you're someone who rook the vaccine because you personally thought it was a good idea or trusted someone who did, I don't have a problem with you.
If you're someone like Albini who used their popularity and status to gas light and bully people into a procedure they had questions about, insinuating they were "stupid" and "anti-science" I hope you live in fear of every twitch and palpitation, every soreness in your chest. I consider you in the same tier of people who helped the Nazi's round up Jews, because you would have. You are petty souls who get excited by authority sanctioned hatred and tyranny. You are the people who enable the worst evils.
"Yes, thrombosis can cause a heart attack. Thrombosis is a serious condition where blood clots form in blood vessels or the heart, blocking blood flow. If a blood clot blocks an artery leading to part of the heart muscle, it can cause a heart attack."
How many more were affected but either not fatally injured or a contributing factor to a fatality officially attributed to another cause?
Given the history of pharmaceutical products the wise move is generally to never take a product that is new, rather wait for a decade or two of market release to see if the product is actually safe and actually does something useful.
I'm pro-vaccine and I'm waiting a long time before I try a new one. Let other people be the test subjects. I skip new to market pharmaceuticals for the same reason.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/05/07/astrazeneca-with...