I got an offers to work on several really cool projects, but the pay is at poverty level basically.
3,658 karma · joined February 19, 2014
I got an offers to work on several really cool projects, but the pay is at poverty level basically.
When I looked at the adjoint event handling code last, I couldn’t figure out in the implementation, whether the general case was handled correctly, especially since parts of it still seemed in flux. Writing similar code in JAX leaves close to no room for interpretation that the code is correct. I am sure most of it is down to familiarity. But since ultimately I want to do ML relared things, right now JAX and related libraries ties up things that are there much more neatly even though overall SciML implements a more comprehensive set of techniques. I am still closely following the work around it especially in the area I am interested in and have some prototypes written in it, but it just hasn’t clicked yet.
I would still think most of this is my failings, but it is also extraordinarily hard to figure out what is going wrong.
All 6 siblings of my partner’s grandmother were killed on arrival in Ausschwitz, as were her parents. She was spared by Mengele and subjected to experiments.
Ultimately weighing atrocities against each other is not super productive. But the myth of a “clean Wehrmacht” had been so persistent and convenient that it took decades to root out in German main stream opinion.
My recommendation would be to focus on one idea or one project and figure out whether you understand the problem space and the existing solutions well enough that you are sure that what you are doing meaningfully improves or goes beyond the current way of doing things. If it does, people with the same problem will take notice, give feedback etc. Some of the research papers I was involved in even lead to several job offers, invitations to give talks, interviews and quotes in popsci literature etc. (and briefly were on the front-page of this site). Twitter is surprisingly useful for this purpose as well, although of course this sort of already implies you have an existing network of people that know you or know what you are working on.
Of course peer-reviewed scientific contributions might be on the extreme end of content production. But at least to some degree my guess would be a similar logic applies to the creation of other content as well. Beginning with an idea, the idea has to pass through several filters for it to be considered worthy of a research effort and ultimate publication. Ideally you should be able to scrutinise an idea yourself, maybe do a prototype or begin writing a few paragraphs based on the premise of a piece. I regard ideas as separate from the actual manifestation in writing or code, however it can be extremely difficult or impossible to get an idea into a concrete instantiation. Ultimately you should be able to trust your own aesthetic or scientific judgement first, otherwise any kind of negative feedback can deter you.
I also strongly believe that quality is really the first thing to focus on, producing high quality content quickly should be a secondary optimisation goal, because as you gain experience, you will (hopefully) be able to naturally produce high quality writing / content with less effort and time investment. People will be able notice attention to detail and especially in the case of software you have to assume that for every issue that is raised a larger number of people encountered the same issue and never returned.
If you are primarily intending to write, there obviously is no better way to get better at writing than to actually write. Even if most of what you write you do not intent to publish.
There is more to be said, but in any case I can only encourage you to start. Since I have had a moderate amount of success in some instances, it has given me confidence to more freely share other work.
The natural resources of the Russian Empire / Soviet Union / Russia together with the industrial base of Germany and France would have been no match at any time of the 20th Century. Both world wars were fought in part about gaining control of the Ukranian (then Russian) resources. The separate peace of Brest-Litovsk split off essentially Ukraine and made it a protectorate of Germany. In many ways the collapse of the Soviet Union and the attempts at integrating former parts of the Russian empire are analogous.
But yeah this doesn’t explain putins actions. I would mostly agree with your analysis of his motivations.
A former Georgian prime minister (same that got Georgia into an armed conflict with Russia and who came into power in Georgia by a flower revolution) became head of Odessian Oblast with US support some time after 2014.
Various paramilitary groups were funded / backed by Russia / US / other people. Among them obviously the “peoples republics”.
Years of investment in “pro”-democracy NGOs many of which are known to be affiliated with the State Department and intelligence fronts, to the point that many maidan protesters / organizers were essentially paid to be there.
The Crimean referendum happened under Russian influence obviously.
The whole Nordstream 1/2 project came into existence because Ukraine was annoying to deal with and some German politicians were more than a bit too friendly and open to Russian suggestions.
In turn there was a lot of planning by the US happening to slow down Nordstream 2.
There are a lot more examples like that. Ukraine is an excellent case study how large blocks / nations follow through on their foreign policy goals over decades.
We are just witnessing in Ukraine how years of foreign interference can go horribly wrong.