klarna allowed us to buy our work phone and macbook paying only the tax value. We had to give them the devices so they would be wiped out by a third party, then they mailed them to my home.
I actually got a very similar automatic response to a take home (that I spent 12 hours of my time on) for an interview process. Some feedback was good, but other feedback was not (one example: The feedback mentions not enforcing a Node version, while such enforcement was in the package.json file). That combined with the formatting made me realize that it was either a 100% copy paste output based on some prompts, maybe tuned two or three words without checking for factuals.
A very distressing experience that prompted me to change how I approach take home assignments.
These are not set in stone and if a dream company comes may be overruled, but:
At least one or more of the following MUST be true:
- Take home takes 2 hours or less
- Take home has a posterior instance that will take place with a human being in order to allow me to defend/discuss/expand the take home. Of course this assumes I eliver something that is not just the word "farts" in a txt.
- Take home is monetarily compensated.
These are heuristics that do not imply I am an impressive IC or something like that. It's just self defense.
Gives the impression of it being by design: They want talent but only for so long, they don't want the talent to "overstay their welcome" thus they complicate things, like not allowing the spouse to work
I think they'll gladly keep the holders of these visas as long as they're desperate. It's not about length of time, it's about keeping them tied to a single employer, working like a rented mule, afraid to speak up. These visas make people good, docile employees because if they aren't they get removed from the country. It's kind of wild that they are so casually accepted.
I think if you make it a moral violation to give people nice things with attached conditions, this will not result in more people having nice things.
You're proposing the alternative "let people live in the US without being tied to a specific employer." But realistically, the alternative on offer is "don't let people live in the US at all."
> The Gemma 3 models are multimodal—processing text and images—and feature a 128K context window with support for over 140 languages.
I'm curious as a multilingual person: would a single language (english/spanish/cantonese) allow for the model to be bigger and still fit in a single GPU?
In the context of another multilingual model I've heard that the majority of its training was in mainly one language, as that training seems to be applicable to languages added later too. To me that sounds plausible given adding a new language would mean vocabulary & grammar while the understanding of concepts should already be there.
Intuitively adding 140 languages instead of e.g. the 5 most common would otherwise be in conflict with making a small model that fits a single GPU.
I once cancelled an interview process because the recruiter, after rescheduling twice at the last minute, never appeared on the interview. To top it off, when I told the recruiter how disrespectful the attitude was and that I would be withdrawing from the process, they asked for one last chance because "they had been having back to back calls the whole day".
I'd have let that slip, but then I saw they called me Sergey (my name is Ignacio)...
moral of the story: each person has their own tolerance for mistreatment. Mine, personally, has thinned. Life is too short to eat shit while grinning.
It's amazing the extent to which companies' recruitment departments don't have their shit together. I periodically get recruitment E-mails from a well-known FAANG company, but they are addressed to "Romane" when my name (not Romane) is clearly spelled out directly in my E-mail address. On one hand, I could write back and correct them and set up a call, but on the other hand, do I really want to go work for a company so sloppy and careless in their human interactions that they can't even get someone's name right? If you're so "excited by the background listed in my resume" then maybe you ought to look up at the top of the resume where my name is.
I do have a litmus test on my linkedin that if passed makes me much more comfortable continuing the conversation: I ask people to tell me their favourite food :p
I'd say only 5 % actually read that (even if the relevant conversations are higher than 5%, I have yet to see an irrelevant one that included the food topic).
That’s a good one. I have a much more basic litmus test on my LinkedIn - adding an emoji before my first name. If they haven’t removed the emoji I know it’s an automated message, and it’s surprising (although not really) how many messages are. I ignore anything with the emoji in, so I know the person messaging has at least minimally engaged in reading my profile.
