yupper32

> Sounds like we wouldn't want you anyways if you have such poor work ethic.

Ouch. I knew I saw red flags in your original post. This seals the deal.

Yes. Put in the time with me to show you're serious. Otherwise you could mass spam candidates, most of which you don't actually care about.

> Have 1-2 interviews with a take home.

> fire those that don't perform up to expectations quickly.

This attitude is why I haven't been recruited. I have 10 years at big tech and companies expect me to jump ship with the threat of getting fired if I don't immediately live up to expectations (even if I'm confident that I will, but I'll never know how high your expectations are until it's too late). Add on wild take home assignments on top of my full time job and (typically) less pay than big tech.

It's simply not worth the trouble.

> Because the data involved information about people I had to write up a document explaining exactly what I was using the data for, exactly what information I would be collecting and why it was necessary, explain where the data was to be stored, and most importantly specify exactly how long I needed the data and when and how it would be safely removed.

This just sounds like a design doc, which I do regardless of if it has to get reviewed by a privacy team or I'm doing anything sensitive. Maybe it's because I've worked for mostly google & ex-googler run companies, but this is just standard practice for me.

Again, you're getting too deep where you don't need to be. You say "if art becomes a product" while I'm showing you examples from 500 years ago where people were paid to create some of the most famous pieces of art in history.

You're tapping into a single category of art -- art that is critical of society -- as if that's the only purpose of art.

The purpose of and the person who commissioned the piece of art is just part of the context and history of the piece. It says nothing of its impact and importance.

You're asking a lot of deep sounding questions, but at the end of the day they don't matter much.

Michelangelo was commissioned to paint the Sistine Chapel. The School of Athens was commissioned by Pope Julius II. You'll find that a massive number of famous art pieces were commissioned, and I don't think you'll find any serious people who think less of them because of it.

I don't know about Proxima Centauri b, but they'll be spending around 25% of "Cycle 1" (the first 6,000 hours of science) working on exoplanets, don't worry:

"Over the coming year, researchers will use spectroscopy to analyze the surfaces and atmospheres of several dozen exoplanets, from small rocky planets to gas- and ice-rich giants. Nearly one-quarter of Webb’s Cycle 1 observation time is allocated to studying exoplanets and the materials that form them." - https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-...

> Obviously the manner of the announcement is insignificant compared to the result itself

Not really, I'd argue it's just as important.

Without solid PR for current projects, future projects get less funding.

SF does this already: https://sf.gov/street-crisis-response-team

I can dislike them both at the same time.

> if a person has just gotten done working for a candidate or someone in office, they should be barred from private industry until they are politically irrelevant.

Wait why? There's already such little incentive to get into public service. The pay is certainly garbage. Hell, the top position in the US government only pays $400k.

Who is going to want to work in government if we get rid of the ability for them to transition to private industry afterwards?

It's also important to realize that the reason Uber and Lyft were able to crush the taxi industry is in part because the taxi industry was absolutely horrible to consumers.

The simple act of being able to know what I'm going to be charged beforehand, and know that the driver has little ability to scam me out of as much money as they can extract from me at my destination made Uber and Lyft SO much better. That should be the bare minimum, and yet the taxi industry couldn't figure that out for the most part.

I do not care about them breaking taxi laws or regulations. Their treatment of their "employees" absolutely needs improvement, but my god I do not care about the taxi industry as a whole.

For all we know, maybe a dozen recruiters were laid off during a hiring freeze. Which sucks but says nothing about the job security for the rest of the company or general company health.

And for all we know, this person isn't giving the correct information regarding blackout windows.

Almost no information here or anywhere else. Any other source? What roles? How many?

Edit: 30% of its recruiting team: https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-lays-off-third-of-talen...

Ok, well it's not going to be solved. So what's your view on it now?

> If these cars can't safely navigate their way to the side of the road using local sensors, they are wildly, hilariously unsuited for autonomous operation.

You are a lot more confident than me that this isn't the case.

> The vast majority of magic tricks are the opposite. The effect is amazing but the method is actually quite mundane.

You're probably right about it being the majority, but I'd say a lot of good slight of hand also falls into the category of the method being amazing.

Penn and Teller are also famous for doing tricks with the secret in full view, and they're often more impressive than the trick done normally.

> However, the primary problem I see with this approach is that we are simply not politically ready as a species to attempt a global-scale engineering project like that.

What's the point of bringing this up? Are you saying that their research is futile and that they shouldn't bother? That we should be funding something else?

There are separate groups of people working on the social aspects. Let MIT and other research institutions deal with coming up with solutions, and let politicians and activists deal with getting the world ready.

From everything I've seen, it'll take a global-scale engineering project of some sort to solve this problem. Might as well have the group of solutions ready for when/if the world is ready.

I agree that space debris isn't too much of a concern if they have a very large grid of these bubbles. A percentage popping over a decade will be calculated in.

But L1 doesn't mean it won't get hit. James Webb has already been hit at its point in space.

What do you mean you ran out of time? Was this a race?

Brake checking is (usually) illegal in the US, albeit hard to prove without a dash cam or witnesses.

So no, it's not the case that people trailing too closely is the problem. It's the case of the Tesla requiring, without good reason, the car behind them to brake hard to avoid the collision. This is dangerous and (usually) illegal.

You and the Tesla aren't the only ones on the road. You can't control people behind you being just close enough to not be able to stop. Or having another person behind the Tesla swerve into you when trying to avoid hitting the Tesla.

There are plenty of scenarios where you are still impacted by the brake checking Tesla without you being at fault.

If it often brakes hard and late to the point that people think you're brake checking them, then you shouldn't be using it. They don't think you're brake checking them, you ARE brake checking them.

Stop being dangerous on the road. This isn't a game.

Oh jeez, yeah that first site looks like an auto-generated scam/spam website. I'd never enter anything into that website.

Most people (including me) think they're better drivers than average. I think I'm probably in the top 10%, at least. Whether or not that's actually true doesn't matter for my argument.

All that considered, I need autonomous vehicles to be MUCH better than average human drivers to consider riding in them. They need to be better than I think I am, so maybe top 5% or so of talent on the road.

1% better than the average human is still an awful driver IMO.

I never understood the need for these frameworks. Every time I try to read into it, it seems to make the assumption that your team are a bunch of children who can't manage their own tasks and escalate issues as they come up.

Write up a plan, get it approved, build it, release it. Escalate blockers or issues along the way and adjust as needed. I guess it's closest to agile but I just see it as... being an adult and doing your job?

All this process seems to just stress everyone out.

I like the word "admittedly" there because I read it as it's a dirty little secret of yours, haha.

> It doesn't matter to me whether or not they only use the advertising data internally.

Okay, but it does matter when you say something significant that isn't true. Do you understand that?

> At least they are not selling my data to advertisers

That's almost never what actually happens, though. They sell access to you and use your data internally to target ads.

A law enforcement request does literally release your data.

We can barely get people to vote once. Why do you think we could get people to vote twice?