Readit NewsMost recently Clojure work. I’ve done a lot of Java of course, although I’ve been rejected from some of those jobs because I spent the last year doing Clojure full time instead of Java.
https://grnh.se/08cec3bb4us - Senior Engineer https://grnh.se/5c028b554us - Staff Engineer
You should take a look and let me know if you have any questions.
It's not a fair playing field. Apple knows that, but pretends that it is.
I say it's a problem, but I don't have a solution. It's hard to say "Apple can't make apps for the iPhone". Or "Amazon can't sell stuff on Amazon". Or "Google can't by ad space on Google Ads".
There clearly needs to be some sort of laws to restrict these kinds of behaviours, to encourage a diverse and open economy rather than rigged games.
So people should have the freedom to harm themselves by not wearing a seat belt but vaccines should be mandatory to stop covid from spreading everywhere.
This is exactly what I was thinking about. If Copilot is fair use, it means that all proprietary source code, as long as they're publicly available to read, will be free to use as training materials for a hypothetical free and open source machine learning project, which I think would be a good thing. An example is a proprietary program released under a restrictive "source available" license, you can read it but not reuse it under any circumstances (and I believe these projects are already included in Copilot's training data). This is why I said fair use can be a good thing and a ruling to reduce the scope of fair use can potentially be used by proprietary software vendors against the FOSS community.
It would be even better if training from all forms of available proprietary binary code can be fair use, too. It may allow the creation of powerful static binary analysis or code generation tools by learning from essentially all free-to-download proprietary software without copyright restrictions. However, the situation of proprietary binary code is more complicated here. Reverse engineering proprietary binary code is explicitly permitted by the US copyright laws, but the "no reverse engineering" clause in EULA overrides it, and this can be a bad thing. It makes FOSS's fair use right meaningless, meanwhile giving proprietary software vendors a free pass to ignore FOSS licenses.
Thus the outcome is unclear, it may go either way, this is why I said such an issue requires careful considerations.
FWIW this seems to be the current interpretation of copyright laws when it comes to machine learning, at least in the US. The only questions I've really seen about the legality of Copilot is about it reproducing code and whether that reproduction is fair use or not. But few are arguing that training the model itself on any available source is violating fair use.
I also think the attitude of companies during interviews really sucks. Many feel like they're doing you a favor or you're wasting their time. That was a distinct feeling I got when interviewing at Google, but not at Apple and I really think it's why I passed those and not google. They were collaborative and fun at Apple. I put a lot of effort into making candidates at my company feel welcomed and like they are already part of the team and IMO it really helps them succeed.
It isn't fair to the person applying because they didn't pick the people on the panel, but if the one doing the interviewing doesn't hide their feeling it's obviously not great.
why would they be any worse than whose ever in charge of your employment.
every country has proven that no matter the the system, without an engaged populace, it can be crippled with corruption.
The idea is that unions help the collective and will get a generally better deal then you might get on your own. But again the isn't going to get everything from management and they have to decide what to prioritize. So if your priorities are different than union leadership your wishes might get left behind to help more other people.
I'm making two assumptions:
1. you don't steal a nuke unless you're going to sell it or use it
2. you don't buy a nuke unless you're going to use it (for blackmail or to blow something up)
And (2) would have been easily noticed.
It was in the news a lot, and was discussed on a lot of tech sites. Plus it gets people talking about their recomendation algorithm, and makes people thing Netflix subscription is more valuable becasue it recommends good shows. It wouldn't be cheap to get the amount of media that they got through more traditional marketing.