gogurt2000

Many aren't. For many it's just a job and they'd happily take a job in another field with better pay and benefits. But that's not super common right now. For the last 20 years dev jobs have been some of the cushiest available.

If its more than 'just a job', there aren't lots of options that are similar. You get problem solving, system design, and working in a mostly abstract space. You can find other careers with 2 of those things fairly easily, but all 3 is somewhat unique. And when you find all 3, the pay and benefits aren't comparable (pure math careers come to mind).

What other careers would you suggest?

Don't write shell scripts. Friends don't let friends code in *sh.

That's not the official SpaceX youtube channel(@SpaceX).

This has been going on for some time now: smaller channels get compromised or bought (today's victim, @spacex-official-corp, had 250k subscribers). Then the bad actors rebrand the channel to look like an official outlet, changing the channel name and logo, even uploading videos from the official outlet or filling out the featured videos with official outlet videos. Then they go live with a shopped video of Elon Musk pedalling their scam.

Oddly enough I talked to a lawyer last night about this. He explained that all of his applicants have passed the bar, so he can be reasonably confident in their ability to practice law. Instead his interviews are about if he can stand working with this person day to day.

IQ tests as part of the hiring process aren't illegal in the US, but they aren't used because it puts the company at risk of discrimination lawsuits.

The validity of IQ tests is debated and their history is checkered: they've been used by eugenicists and racists to support their views and statistically minorities under perform on them.

It's not hard to imagine someone purposefully writing an "IQ test" that's racially biased by focusing on things that wealthy white men know. An infamous example from the SAT in the 70's (and allegedly used later as well) that favors those familiar with rowing (aka: "crew"), a largely Ivy League sport:

RUNNER: MARATHON A) envoy: embassy B) martyr: massacre C) oarsman: regatta D) horse: stable

So it's fine if hard tech interviews are actually trying to assess your IQ, but if they're racially biased it's a problem.

I'm not sure how you're going to get students to use the app and I'm not sure how you could hope to make money off it (if you care about that).

High schoolers are already a very connected population. They know who has a car and who doesn't, so I'm not sure they really need a new app to build car pools. Furthermore, there's little incentive for a high schooler with a car to offer up their services to students they aren't already friends with.

I'm not sure how you can incentivize the drivers. Paying them -- making Uber for high schoolers -- sounds like a bad idea, and the rider students aren't exactly flush with cash to pay anyways.

You might find more success trying to make an app that connects parents of students for car pooling? Parents are incentivized by getting someone else to drive their kids to school and can work out non-monetary agreements like 1 family drives Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and the other family drives Tues, Thurs, and to games/events. But again, apart from running ads, it's not clear to me how you would monetize this.

This is the result of a firehose of falsehood, a staple of the Russian propaganda machine. It's the backbone of Trump's political career. He constantly says blatantly false, absurd things for 4 reasons:

1) It keeps his name in the news so that people who don't follow politics recognize it, even if everything they know about him is from The Apprentice. In marketing, name recognition is more valuable than having the best product.

2) It exhausts his opposition. It takes much more effort to disprove something than it does to make up bullshit. By the time something actually worth fighting for comes up, his detractors have no energy left.

3) It creates so much noise that people don't know what's true and what's not, discouraging them from participating in politics at all and leading them to believe that all politicians are full of shit. This has the added benefit of feeding into Trump's "I'm a political outsider" narrative.

4) It misrepresents what's true and what others believe. If you hear the same headline from 5 different sources, you're more likely to believe it's true. Even if it's false and even if 2 of those sources only mention the headline to try to disprove it. Similarly, the more often you hear a stance the more likely you are to believe it's a popular stance, emboldening you to act if you agree and discouraging you if you disagree.

I'm not sure that it matters. The major video distributors will not agree to distribute your videos if they have a restrictive license attached since they're exactly the players that want to train AI on those videos.

You'd have to create a legally binding license for media and then also build out a distribution network for it.

And even then, I don't think you would prevent AI from being trained on the videos. The players involved are either big enough to violate the law and ask forgiveness after the fact or in countries where US IP law matters very little.

The lab that developed this is backed by the Chinese government. It's likely the extra cores are running code for the MSS from the start.

I don't think he's trying to sideline anyone.

Regardless of how effective Musk & Ramaswamy are as an advisory committee, it will look like Trump's doing something to keep a campaign promise. The average person won't understand the committee is toothless -- Trump will simply say his opponents are stonewalling them and attacking his leadership. His supporters will love the narrative: "those corrupt bureaucrats in DC refuse to listen to these 2 brilliant CEO's who could fix everything."

During Trump's first term he repeatedly tried to operate outside the existing structures and systems of governance. I think he wants Musk & Ramaswamy to do the same. He wants them to be advisors and he wants people in other parts of the government to conform to their advice even if they don't have any formal authority. It removes them from being held accountable and bypasses existing checks and balances.

You can find examples of this from Trump's first term: * Trump rebukes the DOJ in a tweet for not investigating Clinton, the DOJ responds by investigating Clinton despite the Uranium One conspiracy already being debunked. * Trump tweets his disdain for Andrew McCabe, the FBI director who openly opposed him. In response McCabe is wrongfully fired and a criminal investigation is opened on flimsy pretenses, ultimating going nowhere.

The difference is that Trump makes moves like these to persecute his political enemies. Musk and Ramaswamy will likely make moves like these to dodge lawsuits and disarm regulations that are holding back their private endeavors. It's easy to imagine Musk and Trump openly tweeting about how inefficient various EPA regulations are. The question is which of Trump's ally's within the gov't will act on those unofficial orders.

I agree with your position: working for Meta means selling out your moral values.

The argument I see for doing so is usually, "If I don't, someone else will, so I might as well be the one making money off it." I think people tell themselves that as a way to avoid thinking about the ethics of what they're doing. What they're actually saying is, "I value money more than upholding these moral principles"

But I disagree that everyone working there wants to operate ethically and I strongly disagree with the sentiment that the company's moral failings are "due to no fault of their own" because it enables people to be silently complicit. Operating ethically requires individuals to take action to uphold their values.

If you took all of your blood vessels and set them in a line, you would die. Keep your blood vessels inside of your body.

You can't fix this. You can express the problems clearly to those above you, but I would not expect them to hire on the people necessary to make the project a success. They staffed the team as it is, thinking it would be fine, when it should have been obvious that they needed more than 1 dev, 1 artist, an HR person to manage their 2 staffers, and someone to drum up business.

But don't let that discourage you. Everyone works on failed projects at some point. There's 2 important things for you in this moment:

1) Learn what you can from this experience. Think about what you can now identify as red flags from the start of the project. Think about what needed to happen differently and when it needed to happen to avoid getting to this point. Think about the design decisions you made and what you would have done differently. Remember those lessons when you look for your next project.

2) Weigh the stress and time you're putting in vs what you're getting out of it to decide when you need to jump ship. You haven't mentioned pay, but you've mentioned a vague 'opportunity to get a degree,' but your situation is really unclear to everyone here. Value your personal health and do not feel indebted to this company or project -- it's good to walk away if it no longer benefits you. If you're open and clear about why you're leaving, it will be a valuable lesson for those in charge as well.

Last note: I would not call 2 people in management hiring 2 'apprentices' a 'serious game company'. I would consider it a serious red flag if those 2 people in management are in more than a business relationship.

How could it be beneficial for diversity and inclusion purposes?

Crypto's legacy is the globalization of the black market for consumers.

Thanks to crypto currencies, the average person can use a dark web marketplace with reasonable confidence to order illicit goods from all over the world, when previously they would be too worried about it being a scam or too worried about the transaction being traced by law enforcement.

The actual anonymity of cryptocurrencies is besides the point. What brought dark markets closer to consumers is the idea that it's anonymous and safe, and seeing their peers use them successfully.

37 words promising a technical argument that the cinema experience has gotten worse and not a nostalgia trip yearning for the past.

622 words going on a nostalgia trip.

41 words to say "35mm film was effectively a similar resolution to 4k and modern digital projectors are lower resolution than most home televisions."

This extension needs to be called Dogpile.

I would check the app's product page to find the developer. You could also check DNS registration for the website.

Stripe has a tool for getting info about a charge, but I haven't used it. It might just point you back to the app: https://support.stripe.com/charge-lookup

It's not worth it to me personally, but here's how I understand it:

Some iphone users have a bias against green bubbles. Either because the service is functionally inferior (pictures and videos are heavily compressed when sent via SMS) or because they perceive the green bubble to be a sign of poverty (that green bubble person couldn't afford an iphone).

I have no idea how common either belief is, how many iphone users carry any amount of bias, or how much that bias might weigh on their decisions. Nor do I know how many android users care enough about this bias to pay Beeper to try to avoid it, but it was enough that Beeper thought they could make a business out of it.

I suspect that if you worry that people will judge you for having a green bubble, then you must be under the age of 25, extremely insecure, working in an industry where image matters quite a bit, or some combination of all 3. It genuinely doesn't make any sense to me, but then again, there are a lot of things that don't make any sense to me that are deal breakers for our salespeople. Image matters a lot to some people and a green bubble is the equivalent of a used Toyota Corolla or a cheap suit.

As far as using a different messaging app: most people (both iphone and android) don't want to install another app if they don't need to. And the same iphone users who see a green bubble as a mark of poverty have the attitude that they shouldn't have to install whatsapp, you should just buy an iphone.

Just a couple weeks ago it was discovered that you could get ChatGPT to regurgitate training data by having it repeat words forever (source: https://www.wired.com/story/chatgpt-poem-forever-security-ro...). Combined with the overall demand, I suspect they're trying to keep it from attempting repetitive tasks that could be exploited.

Some redditors have reported success in getting it to finish a job with replies like these, but ymmv: No, I'd like you to do what I asked. I’m not sure how to continue from there, can you finish the rest? this is very important for my career

I love the irony here. The sales pitch was that AI is so incredible that it would do our work with minimal effort on our part. No more coding! Just have a conversation with it about what you want done! But it turns out we have to try to trick or coerce it into doing work. Not because the underlying AI is self aware and lazy, but because the guide rails built to keep it from doing things it shouldn't are written in natural language and don't succinctly distinguish between wanted and unwanted behavior.

All 3 of your examples are ad-driven free platforms for finding content that the platform didn't produce. Free platforms are incentivized to overwhelm you with options, forcing you to look at everything, including ads. Like a grocery store or Ikea, they don't want you to make a quick in-and-out visit. They want you to look at everything they have in hopes that you'll be impulsive.

You want pretty much the opposite: a tool. Tools let you quickly and efficiently accomplish a task. No distractions. When you're done, you're done.

The paths to salvation that I see:

- Pay for tools that work well when they're available. I can't speak for them myself, but I know people who swear by <https://kagi.com/> for ad-free web searches.*

- Put time and effort into your own tools. For example, you can setup and run your own search engine. Although, if you're willing to put in that effort you might put effort into hijacking and cleaning up the interfaces of free platforms instead.

- Vote and campaign for interoperability laws to enable others to put effort into hijacking and cleaning up bad interfaces.

*Surprisingly, interfaces don't get much better when you pay for video and music streaming services. I think that comes down to how most people use them. Most people don't open Netflix knowing what they want to watch. They open Netflix knowing that they're going want to watch something, and hoping to find something entertaining.

Huh. You agree to the new terms if you do not notify 23andMe otherwise.

Can your inaction be taken as accepting a legally binding contract?

For price and efficiency reasons you end up with 1 battery that's rectangular in shape. To maximize the capacity of that battery and minimize how thick the device is overall, you make the main PCB long and thin to sit next to the battery inside the case (instead of layering the PCB and battery).

That means your PCB runs along one of the edges of the device. You really only have 3 options for where to put the camera: in a corner along that edge, in the center along that edge, somewhere goofy between a corner and the center along that edge.

I would pick the corner because that's where people hold things the least. If you put the camera near the center and on the edge, then people are going to get their fingerprints all over the lens when they pick it up and hold it. It might be a little harder to aim the camera, but learning to work around that will be less annoying than learning to not touch the camera when you pick up the device or cleaning the camera every time you want to use it.

You could certainly put it in the center of the device, but to do so you either have to layer your PCB and battery (making the device thicker and making thermal transfer to the case worse) or you have to put batteries around the PCB and deal with the added cost and complexity of having more than 1 battery.

It's been a few years since I've looked at any of this, so please forgive me if I'm out of date. I figure giving you information that's probably current is better than what you're getting right now (no information).

The protocol between the card reader, the payment processor, and your creditor is determined by your creditor, but the details of the implementation are not. In the same way that a website can do whatever they like with your credit card information once you enter it, the card reader can do the same. There are some laws and industry best practices intended to protect your card information that vary by region, but your account number, name, and card expiration date are exposed to the merchant even when using EMV. (see https://www.eftlab.com/knowledge-base/complete-list-of-emv-n...)

EMV is designed to provide PIN authentication to prevent the use of stolen cards. It doesn't guarantee an end-to-end secure protocol for each transaction (because that wouldn't work offline).

They could certainly prepare a stream for every video with inline ads that's used as a fall back when personalised ads won't load. Certainly showing a non-targeted ad is better than showing no ad, right?

If you make the generic ads worse than personalized ads (show more, show them more frequently, or just get the most annoying ads) you'll actually get people opting into personalized ads as the lesser of 2 evils.

1) Buy domains that you have no intention of using, but you think someone else will.

2) Sell domains for 500 times what they cost you because you were wrong to think "someone will want this" about most of the domains you purchased.

3) Write a blog to say "Domain investing is a business" instead of admitting it's a ridiculous business that probably shouldn't exist because it doesn't add any value to anything.

A lot of people where I work have one and never stand up at it. I think you should try to find a way to try one for a week or so and see just how often you actually use it standing up.

Other than to be funny when replying in this thread, I don't know why anyone would bother.

So they're working to make users aware of misleading ads, but they've dismantled efforts to make users aware of misleading tweets?

I don't know how this got to production. Advertisers won't like it and they absolutely need advertisers right now to keep the lights on (even shitty misleading advertisers). I wonder how long it will last before Musk kills it.

To be clear, Canna doesn't host any of the pirated music, they just post links to file sharing sites that do. So this case is about DNS resolving the address of a site that links to other sites that host pirated content.

By that logic, Quad9 should block Google, Facebook, Bing, reddit, twitter, and honestly every social media site because they link to download sites where pirated content is available.