> And it's trained on more art critics than any photographer has read.
Your argument seems to be that because of this training, the result will be better art than the human photographer could produce. I'd say there's at least as good a chance that the training will make the photography worse art than the human photographer could produce.
A person studying photography is infinitely more sophisticated than a machine training on photographic information. Photographic art is much more than just taking pictures.
> - 42% are hopeful or excited about the tech industry
doesn't that ignore the overlap?
1102 of 4694 (23%) respondents said they were hopeful
897 of 4694 (19%) respondents said they were excited
So, for example, if all of the ones who were excited also said they were hopeful, then only 23% of respondents are "hopeful or excited about the tech industry".
(on that question they could submit more than one answer)
Nope. I work with virtualization on Linux every day, and have done so for many years (and many varieties of virtualization). I didn't recognize it by the name, and I don't remember hearing about it before.
Licensing is not a substitute for hiring competent people that actually care about the quality of their work, and then giving them the time, resources, and support they actually need to do it.
Government involvement almost always just makes the problem worse, not better. There is a place for control in some areas (medical, military applications, etc), but I think broad-sweeping regulation would do far more damage than good.
> an expensive interview process where the candidate has to be onsite
I'm sorry, but if I'm doing the hiring, the person who isn't willing to come on site to do an interview will be one of the first people off the list to hire (I mean, unless it is a remote job, and the person is nowhere near the employer, obvious exceptions would apply).
In-person interviewing can be extremely valuable. Will it filter out every bad candidate? No, some people excel at faking it. However it can be a big help in finding a good candidate.
> I'm sorry, but if I'm doing the hiring, the person who isn't willing to come on site to do an interview will be one of the first people off the list to hire
Nobody said anything about not coming on site. That's how we used to do it, in the ancient pre-history of 2019. What I said was that if you bring someone on site only to leetcode them, you deserve not to hire anyone.
The downside, of course, is that you don't have the cheap, dumb pre-filter of a memorization test anymore, so you'll have to figure out a better way to winnow down the applicant pool whom you're willing to pay to bring on site.
Maybe finally software engineering will achieve a level of interview maturity seen in other professional fields...but I doubt it.
So if it’s just a shit-test to see if the applicant has enough grit to grind through an arbitrary filter, and not to measure their aptitude, why not use Minecraft or something? Come into our office and show us how long it takes you to kill the End Dragon.
> The truth is like the sun. The light from the sun touches everything, it's bright and it's obvious... yet no one can stare directly at it.
bad analogy. It can be very painful to accept the truth, but doing so is always a good thing. Staring directly into the sun can cause permanent damage to your eyes -- not a good thing.
No this is not true. There is an evolutionary reason why people lie to themselves. Look at the world.
Almost everyone believes in religions. The world lies to themselves on an unprecedented scale. If accepting the truth had an evolutionary benefit then most of the world would not be so delusional. Delusion dominates the population because lying to oneself conveys a survival benefit such that natural selection selects for this trait.
This short infographic illustrates and proves it. But you know what else proves it? Me getting voted down as I throw the truth down in front of everyone’s faces. I’m a target for selection.
Maybe nix will one day be a tool that’s actually good. It has elements of it but complexity and usability hinder adoption. So overall nix is just shit imo. It’s shit wrapped in a dream, a dream of an ideal way to do things. How do we make that dream a reality?
By lying to ourselves. By claiming nix is already there and that other people can’t see the light such that over the years after enough improvements nix becomes an actual good tool because enough delusional people pushed the dream far enough that it actually happened. But in order to do that… people like me must be culled from the herd.
https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/docs/current/javadoc...
I've been away from that world for a while, but still.
At least it was the "Simple" version. LOL.
reply