Status pages at cloud providers aren't usually based in reality -- usually requires VP level political games to actually get them changed especially for serious outages.
Readit Newswaythenewsgoes commented on GCP Outage status.cloud.google.com/... · Posted by u/thanhhaimai
waythenewsgoes commented on In Defense of LeetCode Interviews alexmolas.com/2024/06/21/... · Posted by u/alexmolas
The thing is, all these arguments can apply to any test you do during an interview. It is always under pressure, and it will always be incomplete. You will never know for sure before you actually hire the candidate.
If the interview for a coding job doesn't involve actual coding, how do you know that the candidate can code? What you may get are people who are just really good at selling themselves. Maybe a good fit for the sales department, but not so much for the technical position you are hiring for.
LeetCode is not perfect, but no test is.
As for the "memorization" aspect. You can certainly memorize solutions. But you can't just memorize every character of every solution and regurgitate it perfectly. You will need to make some generalizations, just to fit everything into your brain, and as you type it back, you will probably misremember something, and have to fix the bug or bridge the gap. Those are useful, real life coding skills.
> If the interview for a coding job doesn’t involve actual coding, how do you know that the candidate can code?
LeetCode problems seldom resemble real-life coding scenarios, which in theory is what you are supposed to be most concerned with.
Why not present them with a real problem that you actually had to solve for your business? And ask them to walk you through how they would try to solve that? Perhaps as part of a take-home assignment?
Leetcode test or nothing is a false dichotomy. Accepting it is lacking without attempting to look into alternatives doesn’t seem logical.
>You can certainly memorize solutions
You can most certainly memorize the high level steps to LC problems. In fact I would argue that this is already the status quo. You may still be able to learn how they would approach a problem this way, but if they are good at “selling themselves” they can make all that “seem” real as well.
waythenewsgoes commented on In Defense of LeetCode Interviews alexmolas.com/2024/06/21/... · Posted by u/alexmolas
I don't try to add any pressure, but going on call will require some resilience from each team member.
As long as you don’t wake me at 3AM to rotate a red-black tree, or find the median of two sorted arrays we should be good
waythenewsgoes commented on In Defense of LeetCode Interviews alexmolas.com/2024/06/21/... · Posted by u/alexmolas
I have always seen LeetCode problems as effectively hazing rituals in a job interview setting. A high pressure interview situation simply won’t bring out peak problem-solving capabilities in many people. At best you get some superficial insight into someone’s problem solving methodology, but at worst you filter out otherwise excellent fits for not being able to solve an ultimately inconsequential problem under pressure.
LeetCode questions as interview questions are mostly theater. Most people who do well on these aren’t actually “solving them” on the fly from scratch. They just happen to have seen the exact same problem before and retake the steps they’ve memorized to get to the answer. Testing whether or not someone can regurgitate the solution they have memorized to a math problem doesn’t tell you much about how they will perform in a truly novel non-contrived constraint problem scenario, which is generally what most dev work entails.
Perhaps if you are working at Bespoke Algorithms ‘R Us, benchmarking this would have more value to your org, but for most dev roles at most companies it is hard to see it as more than a compliance exercise, or maybe even as a tool to weed out those with families that can’t devote the hours/day to LC memorization.
No; there’s just been grade inflation combined with greater awareness on what will be on the tests. Objectively, our students are coming out of high school and college with the lowest preparedness for jobs than almost anytime prior, as ranked by employer surveys.
Also, the LSAT is not static. It has changed over the years as instruction methods have also changed and as demographics have changed; so it is not a reliable measure of aptitude in any way.
How would changing the mechanics of grading affect graduate readiness for jobs? I think two separate ideas are being conflated.
Whether or not someone gets an A or a C in a course for Physics likely will not have any bearing on the needs of an employer who needs someone who is a Python wiz for data science.
Maybe the bigger problem is colleges offering undergraduate majors which lack demand, coupled with in-demand majors not having enough relevant course content for the job market, or maybe employers have just gotten more unreasonable in terms of expectations for graduates over time?
It's hard to make the argument these students are less qualified.. look at the acceptance rate of top schools over time, its essentially at or near all-time low percentages for the majority.
Imagine it another way. I am a health care company, you are a congressperson. You want to vote for something I don't like. I visit your office and tell you I am thinking about spending 20 million dollars in dark money ads to help elect your opponent who agrees with my position. As the politician can you even vote for this bill knowing it will probably end up with non-stop negative attach ads against you and your loosing your seat, your ability to vote on other important legislation. You vote for the bill anyway, it looses. The attack ads start, they are lies but they are continuous and overwhelming. You loose your seat to someone who will do what the lobbyist/industry wants. You are now on the outside.
In a just society this would be considered extortion
waythenewsgoes commented on How to build a 50k ton forging press construction-physics.com/... · Posted by u/chmaynard
What strikes me is how great of an investment this turned out to be. Does the US invest in manufacturing like this anymore?
Tangentially, if there were a war today would the US be able to produce as much as it did in WW2?
In terms of raw output, the answer is likely no.
However, this might not matter as much now as it did in the past due to nuclear weapons being the primary deterrent in war these days, and the fact that our standing fleet of aircraft, aircraft carriers, nuke subs, tanks, etc... is essentially second to none. Additionally what we do have is highly capable and extremely specialized, in my opinion, leading to not really needing as many (quality over quantity). Take for example, an F35, which doesn't really have an equal in the skies, we have over 630 of them, with the goal of having around 2500. China only has 300 J-20s which are basically a copy of the older F22. Russia only has 22 non-test Su-57s. Would we have a realistic need to build 1000 of them within a year?
Due to many factors, but primarily free trade and globalization, it's unlikely that we ever see that non-automated manufacturing capacity return, though if needed we could probably mobilize the economy via the defense act to force more manufacturing capacity, though it's hard to imagine we would currently need to.
waythenewsgoes commented on Nintendo Switch's iGPU: Maxwell Nerfed Edition chipsandcheese.com/2023/1... · Posted by u/titaniumtown
That, and a PC is an incredibly inefficient gaming machine. Developers squeeze more out of consoles than PCs. An RTX 4090 has 5x the TFLOPS of an Xbox Series X but maybe it's twice as good on a cross platform Windows/Xbox game.
I don’t think the problem is necessarily PCs being inefficient. IMO it is more likely that it is simply much harder to optimize for random hardware combinations that people run, and that there is a lot of pressure on devs to optimize console gameplay (likely at the expense of optimizing PC gameplay, perhaps devs also see less of a need to since most PCs are better equipped than consoles anyhow, that and deadline pressure)
waythenewsgoes commented on Waymo outperforms comparable human benchmarks over 7M+ miles waymo.com/blog/2023/12/wa... · Posted by u/ra7
>Waymo getting hit from behind, which is the other driver’s fault even if the Waymo acted “unexpectedly”.
Yes, but...there is something else to be said here. One of the things we have evolved to do, without necessarily appreciating it, is to intuit the behavior of other humans through the theory-of-mind. If AVs consistent act "unexpectedly", this injects a lot more uncertainty into the system, especially when interacting with other humans.
"Acting unexpectedly" is one of the aspects that makes dealing with mentally ill people anxiety-producing. I don't think most of us would automatically want to share the roads with a bunch of mentally ill drivers, even if, statistically, they were better than neurotypical drivers. There's something to be said about these scenarios regarding trust being derived from understanding what someone else is likely thinking.
Edit: the other aspect that needs to be said is that tech in society is governed by policy. People don't generally just accept policy based on statistical arguments. If you think that you can expect people to accept policies that allow AVs without addressing the trust issue, it might be a painful ride.
Others may not necessarily agree, but at least anecdotally, a sizeable portion of drivers I see make all kinds of mistakes (law of averages dictates more of them are so called "neurotypical" than not no?).
"Acting Unexpectedly" can often mean following the actual laws and general guidelines for safe and/or defensive driving. I would hazard a guess that sometimes doing the intuitive thing is, in reality, unsafe and/or against the law. If the car does this in 99% of circumstances, and still gets rear-ended, who is really the problem here?
This will probably just hurt innocent people and people playing by the books. I'm a member in a small public Facebook group that gets a handful of full graphic sexual images posted daily by spam bots. If Facebook can't stop so blatant rulebreaking, how are they supposed to stop AI and deepfakes? Granted, it's easier to stop something when it's banned.
If I am reading this correctly then I think it is simply preventing the companies that buy ads on Meta from using Meta’s own generative AI features to make certain types of ads. It’s not really feasible to accurately block AI generated content anymore with good accuracy afaik.