tannerc

Wow this is amazing! The experience and resulting websites are very refreshing. I feel inspired.

Throwback to the StumbleUpon days.

If you read his original draft you can see how much of it was still carried over, as well as how his original writing conveys much of your same arguments that an AI wrote the final text.

I don’t think your point is as strong as you believe it is.

Lastly, I work directly with AI models and utilize all popular generators every single day, so I don’t know why you think you’re the expert here.

So you have zero evidence to convey something you claim is “obvious”? Got it.

I have also used GPTs since 2020. I am also a writer. Much of the writing equated with “generated by AI” is so precisely because it’s broadly trained on real writing.

So the claim of “AI slop” without proof is little more than heresy. It would be helpful to have any evidence.

It’s not about just the writing in one example, it’s about writing patterns—which are common—being equated with AI simply because they’re common.

What exactly indicates the post was AI generated?

This is how I present as well.

When what you’re presenting is something you have actual knowledge about, it can be easier to say what you think rather than stress about “sticking to the script.”

True of public speaking just as much as interviewing.

Many people unnecessarily stress about public speaking because they believe the script is the only thing that matters.

Though I admit there is no one size fits all when it comes to speaking.

Much of blogging (and creation in any form) is often exactly that: an existing idea remixed or reconsidered from someone else’s perspective.

After-all, the telephone wasn’t all that an original idea for a long while before the idea finally reached a salient and effective point.

My take has always been: just because you and I have heard the concept before does not mean everyone has. And if one person finds it helpful to read in this way, that’s a nice thing to have provided the world. :)

In my experience, when you’re applying to hundreds or thousands of jobs, odds are you aren’t clear on what your strengths are and what you want from your career.

And, unfortunately, that often comes across in a résumé and application.

Much better, I think, to spend time better conveying your strengths and interests as they relate to a specific job (or type of job). You’re much more likely to get the interest of relevant recruiters and hiring managers in this way.

The discourse around "are social websites too powerful?" is important to have, and part of the reason is, I think, specifically around the role individuals within those websites.

Elon's public statements around the purchase of Twitter are a prime example, having impacted the company's stock and morale. What's the responsibility individuals have when it comes to making statements on a social website? What responsibility do websites themselves have related to those statements?

This is an excellent take. I personally never want to work in an office again, but I know many—many, many—people who never want to work remotely again after the past two years of pandemic.

We need both: companies that want to support fully remote staff and those that want everyone in-office every day. Having companies with strong stances is a good shift for everyone because enables workers to easily figure out where they do (or do not) want to work.

This is exactly right.

I believe we're conditioned to understand various fidelities of information based on the principles of design. These fundamental principles—things like contrast, balance, proportion, hierarchy, motion, and variety—help us determine how to interpret what we experience.

For example: a webpage that has clear hierarchy of information, is visually balanced, uses motion to attract attention and convey concepts, is much more likely to be interpreted as a final product. Whereas a page that is a bit disorganized may be understood as in early development.

The problem is most landing pages are one page, so the creator invests considerable time in making them look and work well, leading to the perception of a complete project.

Then when the time comes to build a fully functional website/product, there's a lot more to invest in and so less time is spent.

Paradox of shipping an MVP product or business, I guess.

When someone comes to me and asks how to improve their knowledge of front-end or interaction design, I always recommend reading through these guides.

Why? Companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft have put a ton of work into identifying usable patterns which have become convention across platforms.

If you want to be a better designer or front-end engineer, take advantage of the work these companies and organizations have done by identifying and sharing these guidelines!

Gem | UI Software Engineer | San Francisco, CA (remote until 2022) | Full-time

At Gem, our mission is to build the operating system for modern recruiting. Gem is an all-in-one recruiting platform that integrates with LinkedIn, email, and your applicant tracking system. Enabling recruiting teams to find, engage, and nurture top talent.

Our technology stack is configured with velocity in mind. GraphQL, React, and Python are just a few of the technologies we use to enable velocity. Reliability and consistency are also very important to us. We sync millions of emails, resumes, and applications and rely on that information to inform our customers (has anyone on the team reached out to this person?) and services (should we send a follow-up email?). This would be the first front-end engineer to partner closely with design and engineering to help implement and design a seamless recruiter experience.

Find the job description and apply at https://www.gem.com/company/careers?gh_jid=4778626002

Gem | Senior Product Designers | San Francisco (ONSITTE only) | Full Time | https://gem.com

Gem is creating the modern platform for talent teams, from recruiters and sourcers to recruiting agencies and talent operation managers. We just had our third anniversary and are about to announce some big things in the coming weeks.

I'm Head of Design at the company and looking to build out the team with two-to-three senior product designers. Whoever joins me will work to produce tangible designs but also: define culture and processes for design in the company, conduct research and share insights, and much, much more. It's a really exciting time to be in the company.

Apply here: https://www.gem.com/careers?gh_jid=4630197002

Self-driving tech is expensive. It's costly to design, create, and manage. I wonder how quickly that $2.25 billion will be used up.

For comparison (because I was curious how this ranks amongst other big funding rounds): Uber raised $7.7b from secondary funding in 2017. Airbnb series E was $1.5b. WeWork series G was $4.4b. And in 2018 Ant Financial raised a whopping $14.4b series C!

A research paper with n = 2 (companies) isn't exactly representative.

Anecdotally, I've seen the complete opposite (where in-person interactions happen far more because of the open floor plan) at three large companies. So the point stands: open floor plans will not produce positive results for every organization, that's to be expected.

Not every solution will solve every problem for every person.

Some people thrive in open environments, some don’t. Some people need accidental encounters to propel innovative change, some don’t.

To say these types of cultures are “dumb” (or even the opposite) is akin saying “peanut butter is the worst possible thing you could ever eat!” just because you’re allergic to it.

Yeah it’s not clear to me if the author realizes you can change the scale in the system settings and that’s just not what he’s in need of exactly. Might be more fitting in his case to use the Mac OS accessibility settings for zooming in/out, or even just getting an eye exam and some glasses.

It can also be immensely rewarding to read through the likes of Google’s Material site and Apple’s HIG. These resources not only show you what each system contains, but often some of the rationale and dos/don’ts that you won’t get by, say, looking at Gmail and copying what you see there.

I’ve found 30 minutes works just fine for programming as well as the more mundane tasks. Primarily because it’s not always 30 minutes, that’s just the minimum I can get away with on a regular cadence.

Then a spare weekend will finally come around and I’ll have made enough progress that I want to spend an hour, or three, on the project.

The purpose is to make progress however you can. This is also why my other points are so important: work on something that will directly benefit you (scratch your own itch) and have a clear objective outlined.

I’m writing a book on how I do this! I’ll be sharing here on HN once it’s complete.

But the TL;DR for the chapter on motivation and energy comes down to: work on things that improve your own life, set clear objectives, and work in small chunks. The book itself is being written in 30 minute chunks throughout my week because that’s all the time I can spare.