Funny that you're accusation of snark was not without snark itself.
I'll take your word on it for the level of discretion on some public building, though I would have thought/hoped that whimsy would play no more role than a rinsing error. Especially in the current economy.
Maybe it's good there is less superfluous building going on?
> And before anyone accuses me of being some "vibe coder", I've built five nines active-active money rails that move billions of dollars a day at 50kqps+, amongst lots of other hard hitting platform engineering work. Serious senior engineering for over a decade
You sound like a pro wrestler. I'd like to know what "hard-hitting" engineering work is. Hydraulic hammers?
Every time I try to get some handle on the essence of this topic I fail. No different here. In the second paragraph it defines manifolds as "... shapes that look flat to an ant living on them, even though they might have a more complicated global structure"
So manifolds are complicated shapes that are at large enough a scale that an ant (which species?) will think they're flat....ok
So another strategy to do well might include tempting your classmates to distraction or perhaps offering to "help" them but in fact feed them misinformation?
Got it.
I was a customer facing employee for a company whose underhanded policies caused me to face a lot of (legitimate) hostility.
I eventually quit for this reason, and I know at least one other employee who did. That company lost two otherwise good employees.
It works, it's just a question of how much collateral damage you're ok with.
If management want to use front facing employees to shelter them from customer grievance, what other target to people have?
Great, this is a universal solution. Let's all make it an integral part of our digital security, and in 5 years or so hope that bitwarden doesn't leverage it!
Framing is skilled, but landscaping and pest control are unskilled? Are you living in a well framed house overrun with mice and a terrible yard?
I've done some framing. With a communicative foreman and a straightforward building design I did not find it that hard.
Who the hell, in today's market, is going to hire an engineer with a tenuous grasp on foundational technological systems, with the hope that one day they will backfill?!
In Canada, there is no longer any special wage below the minimum for servers. They receive the same minimum as many other blue collar workers.
It's over, there is no longer any reasonable argument for tipping servers but not a whole host of other low wage earners.
Get enough researchers to train their metaphorical microscopes on it and it's interaction with any dimension of human biology for long enough and I have to think the answer will eventually be no.
I've often wondered if it having a reputation as being hard is accurate. Not necessarily because of syntax etc. but because of you don't already have a grounding in programming/engineering/comp sci. it can be difficult to fit the insights Haskell provides into any meaningful framework.
That was my experience anyway, came to it too early and didn't understand the significance.
That actually points to the problem I have with it. I don't think many jazz lovers would balk at reference to a performance as a "jazz performance" without a specification of which one of its subvariants (which by the way are far less numerous than EDM - compare here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jazz_genres, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_electronic_music_genre...).
But in my experience, electronic music fans quite often feel compelled to endlessly nitpick over which subgenre some (almost always) 4/4, uptempo, 4 minute track belongs to.
Whoa there. I've not done the polling but I suspect most EDM consumers think of themselves as music lovers the same way other people like jazz etc. I tend more to agree with your assessment that the vast majority of it is not in the same category as "real" music but I don't think attendees of a rave would go along with that.
It's for a similar reason that I find eReaders to be so disappointing. I have no interest in color or other aesthetic innovations, but I'm very interested in speed. I feel they have yet to reach some threshold such that I can confidently navigate backwards and forwards any number of pages at a time without losing focus.
I'm they're current implementation none of them come close to physical books for that, but I feel like they could if that were the goal.
But if we accept the mathematics of poker are not that complicated, then are those other skills not highly generalizable to any job requiring extraordinary insight into human behaviour?
I've had a very long standing debate with friends about the nature of poker. I'm neither a statistician, game theorist, nor mathematician so I'm very open to being corrected.
My intuition having played recreationally is that the absolute optimal move in poker is relatively trivial to calculate compared to chess/go. That is to say, most experienced players would reach this threshold without too much training.
Obviously, what makes poker fun/interesting is that you are trying to guess the strategies of other players, based on your interpretation of their behaviour, and react accordingly.
If all that is true, then I would submit, that at any sufficiently high (i.e. non beginner) competitive level it probably comes down to luck, since I don't really believe that the second skill described is really learnable.
So when we say "John is the world poker champion for 10 years running and is obviously far better than any mid tier player" are we not saying, essentially, that John is a human polygraph machine. Why, then, is that absolutely astounding skill not being harnessed for something else?
Can't be that old. I had bed bugs in 2012 I believe. I bought some of the recommended insecticide and sprayed a small perimeter and released a couple that I had captured into the middle. They then crawled outward and I was shocked how quickly after they crossed the perimeter they died.
Having recently listened to the freakonomics episode on the same thing I'm mystified by something that podcast and this article do. They state that they're is an estimated 2% of bunk papers or there but then also that they are "becoming overwhelmed by the amount of bogus research" or that they "would estimate that there are far more paper mill papers than general papers" when it's like "swimming in garbage".
2% doesn't seem like it should elicit those sentiments.
I've bad hay fever, for which an allergist prescribed corticosteroid nasal spray. When I told him I didn't want to take it until allergy season because of dependence, he told me that's not a problem and the drug will work better if I take it ALL the time. He is the medical professional I guess but I still couldn't bring myself to take that advice.
I'd agree, but then the number of people that I meet who are otherwise intelligent and thoughtful, but have a casual, uncritical belief in the ability for Elon Musk to lead humanity forward on multiple fronts is shocking.
Have you ever heard of the "all in" podcast?
What's the most parsimonious take.
1) at the inception of ubiquitous photography there was a path of equipment development that allowed for equal quality images of any skin tone, but those in charge spitefully decided they didn't want people with dark skin represented.
2) seeing detail in dark objects of any kind is more difficult (something we all know from using our eyes) and no one felt compelled to spend a lot of time wrestling with this very difficult problem when, at the end of the day, everyone has the general sense that, despite never having met him, they have a good idea of what Miles Davis looks like.
"Cannot be successfully photographed" Um... What?
I may not be a professional photographer, so perhaps there are some color correction nuances I'm not detecting, but I've been seeing pictures of very dark skinned people for DECADES with absolutely nothing particularly jarring or memorable about the quality, or lack thereof, of the image.
I recall Google making a huge deal about this at their last event. Like, "finally we can photograph black people because all our equipment isn't racist anymore!", and I didn't understand it then either.