Youtube comments of Christian Baune (@programaths).
-
1500
-
131
-
For XP, most companies only accept professional experience. In 2001, I was open-sourcing a shell to add tabs to Internet Explorer. Around the same time, Firefox came out.
Before that, I was toying with Basic and made the usual suspects: snake, Tetris, and even a screen-by-screen 3D maze (which will be a raycasting engine in VB6 later on).
In 2005, I did the most challenging track available (Industrial computing) because I already knew most of the material from my hobby. At that point, I already had more than 5 years of practical experience, including trying j2me.
So, I was flying through the curriculum. So much so that I was helping students from later years.
Got my first job without even looking. I just had to say yes.
Then I got fired in the last batch of 300 people due to the crisis.
When I wrote my resume, I listed languages I was comfortable with, and recruiters just binned my resume. So, I took a shitty job, regretted it, and quit.
In all interviews, I was rejected. Good on the technical part, but a danger for the company. With my knowledge, I could decide to go at any moment, which was terrible.
Also barred from most free training because I didn't sit well during test. Acing them is not the right thing to do.
I cried to join a training because they promised that 95% would be hired. Got to join and ''follow" the movement, which mainly was providing support to classmates.
I ended up in a company where I managed servers, repaired label printers, and developed.
I did a burnout because I was doing a 5 man job. So, I explained it to my boss, who didn't believe me for months, telling him I was drifting away.
One day, I just went to his desk and handed him my resignation letter. He tried to say that he understood, that he would change things. I said it was way too late.
He hired 3 people to replace me and sunsetted multiple projects I was working on because the new people needed more time to maintain and improve them.
In another company, I became critical. I warned my boss that the company would die if I got sick for too long or became unavailable. So, I needed a double.
He ignored my request because he didn't want someone sitting on his ass all day.
Then I discovered the abuse on colleagues as it became worse and worse. So, I told the boss that if the abuse did continue, I would quit.
And the worse part was that I was also working for a company developing a database, and who... needed help understanding their implementation. So, I had to send them test reports and bug fixes (realm, which wasn't a good fit for the project, but the boss didn't want to let that go!).
I faked some efforts, we had some discussions, and I quit. A few months later, the company was dead.
Ultimately, I am aware that I am "not hirable" because I don't fit well in a team, not due to any skill issues but my mobility (easy to move on) and the technical gap with peers. The "Why don't you do that? It will take only 5 minutes"." your reply can only be ''Because I am doing more important things that would take you even more time." This is condescending...So, it creates dissent.
74
-
64
-
57
-
52
-
42
-
42
-
30
-
30
-
This almost always leads to funny discussions!
Years ago, I added WSSE to an app and the boss was like "Wow, you did it yourself ? You are sure it's secure ?". Replied something "Ain't stupid, it's a standard.". Then ensued the "but, but, but, it's documented and everyone can see how it works" 🤣
Then I had to educate him, explaining what was a signature and how hard it is to crack and almost impossible when done correctly. Hence the good documentation of these standards.
And even implementing an existing standard shouldn't be taken lightly. One has to know what he is dealing with. Stuff like "side channels" are a thing ^^
I remember HeartBleed news coming on a Sunday. Put down the server on the spot, updated them (fix was available very fast!) and back online in few minutes.
We did lost thousands of revenue. Boss was mad at me on Monday. Told him I will publish our database in free access on our FTP (which was SFTP, but I just said it was a new "ftp" thing to ease it in). Yes, he was rally mad and didn't understood the whole situation. Just ended up saying I would do it again because the loss can be much greater (actually, the company could close if client database is leaked).
I also like: "But HTTPS is secure".
28
-
If you look at the video game industry, there are strong women too. Metroïd is the prime example of it, a whole generation went "Oh, it's a she" and that's it. (seen when you have your first death)
Golden Axe, Stree Of Rage, Alisia Dragon, Ex mutant, Giana sisters, most fighting games...
In fact, gamers never ever questioned how strong are women in video games. They just play the game ^^
On top of that, I can see a girl looking at those hero as models. They really do kick ass things!
And there are villains women too. I can think of the battle toad villain which is a woman.
So, not only women are depicted as strong, but not only as the good side.
One could say women are objectified in some games, but that's the case for men too.
22
-
I did interviews and also offered practice interviews.
There was a guy who did everything wrong.
I told him to dress like he would for an interview; his trouser zipper was wide open, and not all button on his skirt was buttoned. So, I had to tell him to go out and fix himself.
During the interview, he lied overtly, knowing I read his CV and knew his track. During the interview, he gradually turned his head to the side; at a point, he was looking at his side while speaking to me.
After a few interviews that mainly went ok, I told him we would get someone from the floor to spectate the interview. He started begging me to not do that while we walked down the hallway to find someone with some spare time. So, I couldn't do it because I sensed he would be broken. I called HR instead because he knew that girl from HR.
He lied during the interview again.
He was fired because he was terrible on all fronts.
In an interview, I got someone so out of place that I asked him: what is the company's name? The CEO was sitting on my side and looked at me like, "Did I really hear that question?". I was so confused by the candidate's answer that I believed he went to the wrong interview. 😂
Another interviewee was a girl who thought she would get the job because no girls were on the team. I had to explain to her that she did poorly.
I also had a phone screening. One guy laughed loudly and answered poorly after bragging. He was shortlisted by the CEO, to whom I explained the BS.
In another company, we had an interviewee who did spit nonsense. So, we gave him a generated text from "pipotron" and asked the guy what he thought. He gave the same kind of answer to that.
I also had a guy who didn't do great with English and couldn't understand Javadoc properly. But during problem-solving, he showed great intelligence, and when explaining the JavaDoc, what he said made some sense. So, we ended the interview; I gave the feedback and told him he would be hired if he wanted to move forward. His answer was heartbreaking. He asked if it was affirmative action at play because of his skin color. He did great.
So, yes, interviews can be wild ^^
22
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
@sinisterthoughts2896 In French, we did a weird thing. We had neutral from Latin, but it got lost along the way and we decided that only female things would get their specific pronouns, while masculine thing would not and use the neutral pronoun.
The most comical thing is that men (which belong to "male things" -- yes, we have gender for inanimate objects like "table") did not complaint, but women did.
So, basically, if you have a horde of women, you can say "ELLES" and anyone will know with 100% certainty there wasn't any men in the group.
If you have a horde of men, you have to say "ILS" and nobody can tell with 100% certainty that there wasn't any men in the group. (Could be 100% women, but unknown by the person recounting)
So, to say it was specifically a group of men, you have to spell it out: "a group of men".
This huge linguistic imbalance in favor of women was never an issue for men, the laughable part is that women do complaint about it by twisting it weirdly, stating that "IL" is masculine, thus making men much more represented than they are. Reality it that it has the opposite effect, you can question "il" and "ils", but you can't question "elle" and "elles".
It's how you can see that those movements do not care about women and will destroy women for their own interest.
17
-
16
-
16
-
A school did "a" to me. They deleted my record and then stated I never registered with the school. So, I asked to be refunded the money I inadvertently wired to them. It was enough to do to have the record reappear ^^
In fact, as soon I asked to be refunded on the basis that I never registered with the school, the guy went from abuser to apologetic.
It went from "Si, you were never registered in this school and I never saw you" to "Oh, there was an error in your file, it was deleted, but we can recover it".
The thing is that we don't pay much for the schools, so they weren't afraid of refunding me. They were afraid of what it entail, basically, that they had a phantom student and the state really don't like this! They would have to explain why they had to refund me and provide a new head count to the state. So, a lot of paper work and a certainty to be fined.
I don't understand why they tried to pull that and I was lucky to have that wit in the moment.
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
3:18
People who are highly resilient can see the life as a mixed bag of events on which we can have an hold and those which we can't.
Most people believe wrongly that they have a significant impact on their life when it is not the case.
That's why betting games work so well, that also why we develop beliefs and why the Skinner bow works so well too.
So, someone can say "I was unlucky" when he meant: "considering I had no way to change the course of events, it was all bad luck".
I have been placed in various institutions and I didn't had a say about it. When I needed furniture, I had no way to get those by myself and they would be bought in a batch with other kids required furniture. As a result, we all started the year with bad notes of our teachers, even when we explained the situation.
As a grown up, shit like these still happen. You are working on something, then someone come to you and say it is cancelled or the scope of work has changed.
Or, you need to go to an interview, you take a 1h window and there is a strike. So, you have to cancel the interview.
There are many important events that will shape your life and on which you have ZERO control. Thinking otherwise is totally immature.
That's really a mixed bag of events on which you have more or less control. Recognizing which is which is maturity. Thinking we are always in control or without control is immature.
It's really important to emphasis that the extremes ARE what poses problem. It's OK to sometimes recognize you've no control.
14
-
13
-
13
-
5:25 I remember vividly that in the '90, the teacher would remind us many time to not even look through the windows, because we could be photographed then kidnapped...It was in Belgium and pedophilia was really organized.
Also, through the years, taxes increased a lot and inflation kicked in, pushing people to buy properties, even if they need to male a loan, because the big interests were still lower than the inflation. So, getting is debts was and is still cheaper than keeping money on an account (or spending it on daily goods).
Taxes are huge in Belgium, even forcing celebrities to fly out of the country.
That means that even if you get few hundred € more of gross, it can translates into pennies. So, it doesn't incentivize being rich. On the contrary, you want to be at the end of the tax bracket you landed.
Ours school, even if we score well on PISA, are in bad condition, lacking means and a lot of teacher defect because they can't endure anymore. We have a "good" score on PISA, because other countries managed to do worse...
On top of that, Brussels bureaucracy is 10 times bigger than NY while there are roughly 10 times more people in NY, so a factor of 100 per head!
Europe is not really a success either.
As for welfare, once you secured a job, the state will do everything to keep you employed even if you are crushing your soul. Workers are what allow to spend money freely for the state.
It's anecdotal, but had very hard time at work with some psychological damages that turned physical (tiredness and anxiety). I contacted the employment office, because they have a program for job conversation and with extra help if it's to enter a job in penury. Because I was marked as active, the only reply I got is a list of all "punishment" I can have if I quit my job. (i.e. I didn't qualify for job change). Yet, I already paid the equivalent of many net salaries in social taxes.
It's a system which creates social classes and make people captive of them.
Another consequence is that people usually don't give to charities and most can't even name a few of them. They are already giving around one quarter of their salary in social taxes, more than what American give to charities. And for each employee, the boss also have to pay social taxes. (When an employer want to hire, he has to have at least 3 times the new hire salary for that to be feasible).
So, if you take this into consideration, everything is really expansive, from school to healthcare.
It also create great imbalances. As an example, when you are unemployed for a few years, you get the BIM/Omnio status, this means that dental (among other things), is free of charge! When you earn a salary, dental can cost you between 500 and 2k... Thing is that Belgium welfare became an hammock for those who know which string to pull.
And in the latest news, Brussels is trying to acquire housings. They asked to be able to preempt houses (So, if you conclude a selling act, Brussels can dismiss the buyer and buy at the same conditions and the seller can't retract) and they also made a program where you can buy houses a bit cheaper, but then it goes back to Brussels once you die. Any clues why they want to own housing so badly ? Because that's how you can get more money from people! Need more income, increase rents!
The good side is that the taxes may actually decrease while rent price go up, which will hugely benefit those who were smart enough to buy!
It's also possible that Brussels raise property taxes enough that they can repossess houses. That, we can't know, but it's a possibility.
12
-
12
-
You'll not like the answer: Mensa 😂
I have watched very passively people discussing about the origin of a coin and the meaning of the figure. The three people did a grand tour of history, art and even geography. I didn't even had something to say, it was just interesting to see those people mentally wandering around a coin and deploying so much knowledge for something of so little impact in their daily life. But it was their satisfaction to try to find explanations.
I brought a friend once and he was disgusted after few minutes, because people presented themselves through their pedigree. Most having multiple degrees and written one or two books and he felt diminished as he failed his studies. So, we left the group quickly at his request and he told me they were full of themselves. He didn't read it right and most people would not as it's unusual. But when you're about to discuss something, it's good to understand what are each people specialty before getting started. So, this is done to make things easier to everyone and not for bragging rights. But his mind was set, so we were not able to go back to the group and we left the gathering.
When I was younger, I met people in dancing club where we tried to avoid the music to speak. Weird how you can stumble on people like that.
When I was tacking the train for long distance, I also met older people having a lot to say on today society and who thanked me for the discussion.
I deplore that people fear to speak to others, because I had eye opening discussions while waiting for the tram or bus.
Also, I am that weird guy who like to explain math at parties 🤣
11
-
Partially right. You need to know what is available to you so you are able to gauge if it's worth to investigate it more.
You would never consider hooking an FPGA to your server for heavy processing (e.g. cryptographic hashes), because you don't know it's a possibility.
As an SE, your job is not to reply to some request, but help your client/employer do the right thing. That may even means no programming at all. (Changing processes)
So, no need to learn in-depth, but surely required to learn as much as possible.
Where it's nuanced is that you can do it in an intelligent way. If you know Angular, Dagger is not be be learn as it's basically the same principles at play. If you know a C family language, C, C# or Java shouldn't be that complicated etc.
But if you totally ignore one aspect, then you'll never learn it when required, unless it's part of some specifications you got.
It's why in the academic track I got, we did a grand tour. I even programmed robots you find in pharmaceutical companies. Did also some German assembly, designed an build pcbs for interfacing, analyses a library processes etc.
Stuff I would have not done on my own and that gives me an edge.
In one of my job, my interview was cut with "Ok, you are hired". I asked how they came to it and they replied that I was the only one who pulled some UML and asked the right questions.
They asked me to make a small program which was an ETL and before digging into the code, I did a small design. The created only one class to have the "feel" of it, then called them to discuss the solution before churning through code.
In the end, though, there is ample room for self taught people. They can do basic algorithms, which are 90% of the jobs (mine is a bad example as I mainly works with trees transformations). Then you need only one guy who know how to tie everything together and being efficient while keeping it readable and maintainable. That's also that guy who can tell what is worth learning. Still, there is a huge plus-value to have some IT culture.
11
-
@rossmanngroup In Belgium, we have a 7% inflation per year on average while the index tops at 2%. Full loan to buy houses are now forbidden and house prices are sky rocketing forcing people to rent. On top of that, Brussels is rolling out a plan to allow people to buy their houses cheaper if the state own them when the die or want to sell it.
The state is also changing the cityscape to discourage the use of cars and also offer one year of common transportation if you turn in your license plates.
As an example, Brussels is making sidewalks bigger, transforming street in pedestrian only area, removing parking place, limiting number of parking place per company and limiting speed to 30km/h (except for buses). In Namur, they force people to make huge detour by making an almost one way circuit through the city AND they change it every two years so people don't get too used (maximal annoyance thing).
Another funny thing is that a lot of people think we vote, but that's a few decades we don't. We go to the voting boot, record our votes and they get counted. But that's consultative. The parties can decide how they group together to have more votes. So, it's not even the party with the biggest number of votes who is in power. These are the parties who "agree" to be together. The last two elections were not convenient for the Party, so they just ignored them and this is how we went without government for years! Then, they magically come into full power as we can't stay without government for too long.
They can't let us vote, because people still want to be owners. and for that, too much socialism doesn't help (More redistribution, so higher taxes).
Belgian have a brick in the stomach (literal translation of "une brique dans le ventrte" which is a very Belgian thing).
I am waiting the next election in hope we will be without government for the third time in a row and that it will be a wake up call for everyone, but that's dreaming in colors!
11
-
11
-
Things have to be contextualized. "Little experience" meant someone who knew how to peek and poke memory and wrote a few classics (snake, Tetris, pacman...) and usually mixing primary with assembly, if not going complete assembly.
The entry barrier was high, and JS did a lot lower it. Each new language lowered the bar.
How many people could create a simple platformer game if they had the only facility to display sprites? Very few considering how people are stumped by game engines that do 99% of the job.
In my first year of CS, we were tasked to make various games in ASM (tasm and nasm), like light-out tanks. And one of the final exams was doing a UI, but if you did your projects correctly, it took a full hour at best. If you didn't, the exam was 8h.
And even the tools lower the entry bar. When I started, I did web pages using Notepad, and the browsers didn't had debug tools. There was the "view source," which would show you what you typed in Notepad.
Also, don't forget that browser did suck in rendering HTML. One misplaced page and your table base layout became funky.
One has to consider how JQuery was a godsend at some point.
Sure, today we do SPA games in the browser. But you've like a catch-up that happens between what you are asked to produce and the advances in ease of use of technologies.
As a stupid example, having a date picker on a web page was quite some work. Then came JQuery, but you still had to find the right JQ plugin. Then browsers implemented type=datetime.
So, now, if you need to input a date, it's a given that you should show a date picker. It looks more complex, but it's infinitely much easier to do.
Even for games, you can program those in Godot and deploy them to the web, thanks to WASM.
Always consider the times when things were created.
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
When I was a QAM, I sat down with the developer and discussed, knowing what was wrong and what was a better way to do it.
That way, the developer knew why it was incorrect and why the new implementation was better.
I had a developer who told me, "fuck you," because his code was full on SQL injection and XSS. 🤣
To top it off, the management was not backing me up (I was free-floating).
Then, they got hacked by a gray hat, and they understood how important it was to fix those.
I fixed many of those myself, then took the time to explain how prepared statements work and how to sanitize for output in HTML.
One guy left, and I was a "plus" for another guy. He wanted to go because there were not enough challenges, and I could retain him until I quit because I told him that in other companies, he may not have someone to show him cool stuff.
In fact, when I left, the team dissolved in a few weeks. 🤣
Basically, if you're a QAM, you should do your job with passion and grow others.
9
-
@rockhaze Wow, bold ignorance there and that's why you are assertive!
It's not detainment, it's part of the procedure and the officer can't keep you more than the time required for the intervention.
The officer can't know and the man had a threatening behavior.
I am trained in Taekwondo, if I can't fly, I'll fight and if I tell you to step back and you don't, I'll go all in on you to enure my survival. Even if you just wanted to get closer to talk to me. Order and delimitation were clear. Also, by law, I'll be given reason.
If I let you approach, then realize I did it wrong and you slap me and I retaliate, by law, I am wrongdoing.
Funny how it works, uh. Yes, I was registered, so those are things I had to learn.
Where she went wrong is indeed that she didn't tase him, but she probably internalized that it would have turned into a racial issue. All the other cops were probably having the same issue. You can see a lot of videos with white guys where the cop is "ok, you asked for it" then here come the prongs 🤣Even videos where they shoot with bean bag guns...
Also, you would quickly die if you were a cop and I hope you'll never annoy a trained individual like me, because you would go for your death or a solid beating at best (incapacitating).
I have been arrested because I played with replica near a bank and they got a call. Cops gave me orders and I complied, nothing really complicated. The cop even insulted me and I didn't bother to reply. What could he do ? In the end, I got nothing but an inconvenience and knowledge that it was illegal. My brother didn't understood why cops were following and entered into a brawl with them. As a result, he took a beating and a free night in cell. (Yes, they can do that!)
It's really important to get the right information and understand what is compliance, which level and when. At least, if you don't want to be injured or worse. (+charges)
9
-
In BASIC, well, it was very present. I learned that on my own and was used to put GOTO everywhere as it was the way to skip code based on a value "ON x GOTO label1,label2,label3" (or line numbers!)
Then I used GOTO also to recycle code (as in GOSUD).
Very good for state machines too, even if I didn't know it had a name.
Then I had to take visual basic courses at school and the teacher was pulling her hair reading my code...no FOR and IF, GOTO worked just fine. On top of that, I kept my habit of reusing code.
I am not even sure I would be able to understand my own code as I totally forgot that habit. Still, have good memories of that because the teacher ended up saying she will not correct it anymore and just give points for it working as intended. ^^ At the same time, others had troubles to understand what a variable was and I had already implemented snake and Sokoban just for fun :-D
(As devs, we find it to be very simple, but I taught a bit too and this is a huge hurdle!)
9
-
9
-
9
-
For more: https://esolangs.org/wiki/Main_Page
Also, I do think the the older generation is closer to be language lawyers than the newest generations.
RTFM was really a thing back then because it was almost your only resource to work with.
Also, if you didn't read it, you were guaranteed a hard bite by things not working as you would expect.
Or simply because you would do something in a very sub-optimal way.
As a simple example from today, PHP permits to write this "$a[1][2] = 3" and will automatically create two arrays.
No need to check, the language already does it for you!
You'll see that people knowing that kind of stuff tend to be the older too!
Also, after few years, you should naturally encounter paradigms you didn't saw. At that point, it may vest your interest.
If you look at my channel, you will see I dabbed in those too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlGPxtd6J5k
It's a "tipping point" and not everybody tip.
Also, most of us are quite discreet 😁
Here are two languages that only exist there:
http://www.programaths.be/testlang/
http://www.programaths.be/eer-designer/
9
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
I have a Bachelor in Industrial Computing, tested into Mensa, and tutored students through Algebra, Calculus, Algorithms and Graph Theory (although, for a very limited time) and I am now doing a second bachelor to be a math teacher. I can concur that people have vastly different abilities in mathematics. Saw a lot of freshmen having troubles...with fractions. Other with spatial awareness and other unable to abstract a problem written in plain language (know the mechanical part of math, but not how to get there). The worse I saw was an high school student not knowing how to test for divisibility by 3, then shocked, I asked by 2 and was even more surprised (Thanks COVID!).
You can have "equity" through differentiation. You teach 100% and test on 80%. Also, you provide two tracks, the "normal track" with 5 hours and the "advanced track" with 8 hours. So, the best of the best in mathematics can chose the hardest track and decide to learn 100%.
You also offer remediation, which are extra hours that the slowest can take if they wish.
So, yes, the outcome will not be the same, but everyone will have the same challenge opportunity.
What is very counter-intuitive is that true "equity" comes through flexibility, or in other word, inequalities.
There is no point in shoving linear algebra in the throat of a student having no abilities whatsoever. It's also equally stupid to tell to a student that he won't learn this, because we can't shove it down the throat of other students.
This still lead to the question: what's the bare minimum that should be taught ? Not much on the content, counting, fraction & ratios, first and second degree. On the transversal competences, there is much more: problem solving, critical thinking, expression (Written a& Spoken).
In Belgium, students can chose a path where the most complicated mathematics is about evaluating algebraic expressions. Those guy becomes successful plumber, electricians, masons, ... and they are well paid too. And some even take a few transition years to go to university.
Diversity is what makes equity. It's funny that those who fight for it, make everything to avoid it. Our system is not perfect, but it's not that bad considering what we can see in other countries.
And yes, I copied OP first line because I found it funny he felt the need to put his "credentials" ^^
Also good to learn about: Active learning.(Montessori Method)
7
-
7
-
6
-
@sjuvanet We are not speaking about members, but about the organisation which offers plenty of services (GIS, SIGHT, Mensa Select, Mensa Youth ...), organize events/activities (Intelligence day, open days, affordable testing ...).
It's not disingenuous, I contribute in helping kids growth their IT skills and I am not even a considerable part of the population. And again, we are speaking about the organisation!
Good you are not here to brag, that would be very awkward!
6
-
6
-
@KevinJDildonik In interviews, I asked to implement "overlap(a,b,c,d)" where a and b are respectively the lower and upper bound of the first range and c and d are respectively the lower and upper bound of the second range. So, they don't even need to validate that. Yet, most programmer fail to write good code.
And there are plenty of libraries for hat, yet, if they can't write such a simple code (it's a one liner), they certainly can't think about more involved problems where you need to use two or three libraries the right way....
And to top it, in my field (Tree to tree transformation driven by trees), custom made algorithms are a daily thing.
And no, I won't be asking a dev to do something we do on the job, because I don't have 2 weeks of interview ^^
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
I had to "fight" a girl who was buffier than me. While she tried to hit me hard, I was actively trying to not harm her, which took much more effort than just going straight to put her down. I was getting tired of doing that, so I ended the fight by tacking her by the hairs to smash her face into a wall, except I put my hand (and crushed it) in between so she was not really hurt, only really shocked. My hand did hurt, but she realized that it could have been real.
It was totally stupid from her, but in institutions, you need to show you are dominating or you are going to suffer a lot from people trying to take advantage of you.
And even when I was training in Taekwondo, I was paired with a big girl who din't really understood what a "touch" is and went full swing. Complained to the master after trying to explain to her. The master dismissed me and locked our pair so I could "toughen up".
We were paired with girls, because we all learned to do "touches" properly, so there were no real differences beside that it's impressive when a fist is going for your face and you've to not move (except me, who had to react promptly to deflect it). That master was very though on everyone, even running on our abs while weighting above 90Kg.
And when fighting, girls were spared 🤣 We saw "fights" where the guy just came close, picked the girl and flattened her while laughing. But these were most for fun than exercise. Also the one to many fights were girls didn't had the time to strategize, so it was a mess and very entertaining. Usually, it was a higher ranked man who would just stood almost idle until the girls are tired, then put them down in funny ways.
It wasn't to be sexist or anything like that, it was just to make a fun moment and even the girls had fun trying really hard.
It was a time where we knew the differences and respected them.
You were able to have fun without being called randomly for misogyny.
And for those not understanding, there were the same thing with kids trying to take on a full grown up.
And during demonstrations (public events where people can see what you are doing), we had kids and girls taking on black belts. Except that there, it was a choreography were they won against the black belt in comical ways, like rolling between the legs then jump to grab the throat and smacking him down. Which is harder than it looks to perform and takes weeks of preparation! (that permits to highlight gifted individuals)
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Ils retournent leur veste car au début, c'était "Oh, bon, pas grave".
Puis le gens les moins cons se sont insurgés : "Comment ça, pas grave ? On en connaît rien".
Puis il y a eu quelques morts, puis un peu plus de morts.
En prime, une période d'incubation plus longue (24-27 jours) et même des porteurs saints.
Et puis, des mutations.
Là, c'était bien trop gros que pour continuer a nier l'évidence.
Donc les média vont dans l'autre sens (pas suicidaires non-plus!).
Quand un virus est nouveau, tu informes la population et la met en garde. C'est le principe de précaution.
Ce n'est pas du tout ce qui s'est passé!
C'est le biais du survivant:
- Les médias minimisent la situation
- La population ne prend pas de précaution
- Infection, décès
- Les médias exposent la situation
- (dans le même temps) Mise en place de procédures dont des quarantaines
- Moins d'infections, de décès
- Le peuple pense "Ah, ben pas si grave".
Ben oui, on est plus vigilant et des plans sont en place.
Ce n'est pas évident, mais il faut réfléchir plus loin que le nombre de décès ou de contaminés.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
@katekilgannon3567 When I started in consulting, we were "swappable". So the uniform helped in that regard. It also removes all personal identity, which is a good thing in the workplace. You don't want politics to get in the way, you want untainted communication. It's also helps to blend as it removes all biases based on appearance. In the end, what matter is what you do.
You get to know people during breaks, that's were you get your emotional bond. Also, when you have to work with someone you never saw, you also know there is a basic framework that everyone had to learn. So you know what to expect and what is expected from you.
This was really dystopian for slackers, of course. So the first weeks, a lot of people resigned. From time to time, few people departed because they saw they couldn't leverage politics to avoid work. (Anything not being KPI is worthless)
Today, I work 100% remote, so I dress as I want (decent though, still have calls from time to time ^^). I strongly signaled I am against politics in the workplace, so I am shielded from it and just do the technical stuff.
In private life, though, I sponsor OSS and before going back to studies, I volunteered a lot. Still, none of my coworker know about it. Only my boss when I had to take a day off for a special event, not even sure he remembers.
That's really important that people can work together regardless of their financial success, past, origin, beliefs... Uniforms helps a great deals. (And well established processes and protocols)
And to top it, it helps in the morning too, you don't have to think about your outfit. It also makes a clear cut between private and professional life.
And to make it easier, the company offered a cleaning service free of charge! You just had to hang your suit next to your desk and next day it was there, but cleaned!
The only way to know that my boss was my boss at that time was looking at where he sat (next to the team) or looking at the "who is who" where the role was indicated. The only ones that were different were the pink shirts (top level management that you only see when going to eat and with which you've no business outside team-buildings).
The negative side is that you can't signal. I find that a positive though.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@janinebelleestrada7096 Because you are interesting to them too. I have a best friend who like cars, bikes and sports and he is not the brightest in the room. So, I don't speak about math (my preferred topic) with him, we speak about his passions, we also clubbed. We both like video games to some extent etc. On the other side, that guy can hit a 15cm target at 100m with a pine-cone, run over a wall and do the flag for few minutes (Above 2 minutes, it's already exceptional). That's because we are that different that we are best friends too, there is a lot to share or jump on a rope from elevation (If you try that, you will quickly realize how soft are your hand and how weak is your grip) !
Once, we did an escape game with 4 people and we were split into two groups. I was with him and the other group was laughing their ass off because they realized I was basically on my own. After the first stage, we were joined together and there was two "puzzles" requiring agility. He did them first try, while it was really hard for us. So, we crushed the clock and were glad he was there for the finale and we had a good laugh at ourselves and how he did obliterate those "puzzles". I can tell you that he was the star of the show ^^
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Twice and it went so wrong!
The first one was offered a personal coach (me). His company hired me to give one to one sessions for 3 months.
Right from the start, I saw the guy would be a huge issue. His answer to "What are you doing in this company ?" was already hinting me that he would be a though one!
After few weeks in, I gave him a book reference and told him that he had to read 10 pages every day (there was diagrams and illustrations -> Java Head First).
The next day, I would explain what he read and what is coming up. That way, he would have the information twice, opportunity to ask me AND practice with exercises I did provide.
I quickly realized he didn't bother to read a single page, so I had to do interrogations AND add questions to be answered while reading...
Literally had to treat him as a 12 year boy!
On top of that, I had to train him in taking interviews and it was even worse. When I told him that I would film the fake interviews to annotate and review with him (so, very private recording), he was flipping. After some time, he got used to the camera awkwardness. So I told him that I will invite a stranger for the next practice rounds. He did beg me not too, as if I did pronounced a death sentence (that looks funny, but that actually take a toll on you!).
At some point, HR became involved and they saw that the guy had a very bad behavior. So, we were both summoned.
HR team started to say him what was wrong, what they expect and actions he can take.
As soon we get off the meeting, I ask him: "So, what do you take out of it ?" and he replies "They really don't like me". Ouch!
I was boiling, but had to hold composure and reiterate what they said in a more friendly way.
As an ultimatum to get him to make some effort, I told him that at the end of the training, there would be an examination and that he would be fired if he can't pass it because of incompetence. He got fired...
The other one was a team leader. I was hired to show him spring. The guy made himself unavailable as much as he could and I noticed it. So, I took him apart and told him I was very unhappy of what he was doing! So, I started to work on the project and saw that the department sucked in resource management. No real planning, no real allocations, employees who complaint (even one who jumped out of his chair and started yelling!).
So, I reported that to the manager and told him that we are now targeting years and not *months*.
Then I forced a process and the dev did speed up a bit. A soon I did let it go, we went back to an undescriptible mess. Enough was enough, during a stakeholder meeting, I explained why the project did suddenly go much faster and why it did stale again. The same day, I learned I was fired because I didn't comply with tools to be used (wrong) and that team mate went to the office of the supervisor to complain (My chair was against his door and to get in or out, you had to ask me to move!). In short, they made a long list of lies.
Then they asked a confrontation and I accepted it explaining that I did actually record everything that did happen near my computer. (An habit I took because consultancy can be very weird!)
Well, they cancelled the confrontation and I got paid to do nothing else, but find any position that would suit me.
Then I have been told by other consultants that the company I was assigned has no issues ending someone career and that I was very lucky to have proofs of well behaving!
The company who sent me to them just blacklisted them as a result.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Gender studies can't be right about gender, because gender studies is not about studying gender, but trying to define it to fit the identity and social construct narrative.
Ethnologists and anthropologists doing studying gender almost never say they do gender studies and they despise each other. One is a real science, the other is liberal sciences.
There is a distinction between sex and gender, but the two are tightly bound.
Sex is purely biological. Gender is also biological, but from an external perspective. Societies discovered gender first, sex second...not the other way around. Gender studies will "get that wrong" almost always, while it's a given for ethnologists and anthropologists as sex had to wait for sciences to evolve to be fully understood.
Primitive populations still use gender as their definition of sex. They see physical attributes and use that to describe male and female humans. The same drawing of lines and triangle with a line can be seen. Same with chest attributes. Those are biological traits defining gender in the least evolved societies. It has nothing to do with identity and they don't know about sex. For them, sex and gender is interchangeable.
In more advanced civilization, the need to define sex properly became important as it impact on many aspects, from psychology to physiology including chemistry. If we want the best for people, we need to cater for sex.
Old dictionaries conflated sex and gender, because "gender" was upgraded in meaning as sex was more scientific and people not being anthropologists, that was a too technical nuance. In day to day parlance, both terms were interchangeable and dictionaries are for usual language, not jargon.
It slipped because of people ignorance and the desire to follow an agenda while discarding the reality and shutting down any ethnologists and anthropologists going forward. Gender studies did exist way before the field was created, but those doing the real studies are just being silent.
gender is as much as a social construct as it is the result of primitive observations (and primitive doesn't means "bad" or "to be discarded").
sex is scientific and gender is a very good predictor of sex. (It's why gender is used to find out sex for newborns, then lab results can confirm or nuance it for very rare cases)
If someone working in gender studies tries to tell you what gender is, you are just losing your time! Most of them failed to even understand what it is. Anyone being both ethnologist and anthropologist will give you a much clearer picture, which boils down to what I wrote.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
@cobramcjingleballs Well, I have to be vaccinated AND I have to wait for it. Not because of schedules or anything else, but simply because I would be too tired (Hepatitis A)!
So, it's basically doctors telling me: Vaccine is mandatory, but your actual condition requires us to wait.
So, vaccines are, in effect, limited to effectiveness, side effects and health of the person. It's just that this kind of stuff is not advertised, you are sent home with a "not right now, you have to fortify". (Belgium)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
That's because Mensa issues grants. So, you barely hear about them as it's of no interest to MSM. Neither it is new or contricersial.
Member benefits like SIGHT service, SIG groups and various company giving reductions is not that interesting to speak about.
So, quite frankly, what Mensa does is very good but boring.
The loudest Mensa members never saw a membership and I have doubts they even saw an IQ test.
You may have seen one or two real member boasting about it. Just recall that 2% of the population is huge and a fraction of it still stay quite big. So the potential to have 100 assholes who are very loud is there!
Mensa membership was never about solving important world problems thoug.
Identify, foster and promote intelligence. That's what Mensa stands for. The membership goes toward that.
I think Mensa is wrongly represented the rare times it gets exposed on MSM. Too much focus on the people and they forget to remind the goals.
But it's more entertaining that way for the audience.
So, the analogy does not hold. Paying Mensa is like paying WWF because you believe in their cause. They will do their thing and help you work toward their goals.
Very same for Mensa, you pay them, they offer you services and your funds get into grants. And as in WWF a part of the membership goes for running the company.
Now, I acknowledge than "save the animals" is more relatable than "identify, foster and promote intelligence".
3
-
3
-
3
-
Context. We learned to use the tables and rulers in primary school because they were late to the party.
And the use of tables was widespread. If you wanted to know your train schedule, you also had to look at timetables.
Also, use of various indexes. I still have a book where the index gives you the page number, the quadrant, and the sub-quadrant. Most people can't use the book!!! It's like a puzzle for them.
Even more stupid, there are "random" numbers on the border of the pages...those indicate where the map continues 😅
Even looking up in a dictionary is challenging for people. I saw people "browse" the dictionary and explained how they could get very close to the correct page if they knew their alphabet and could think of Scrabble.
As a kid, I would always start in the middle, then try to take the right half and split until I had a few pages to work with. The teacher would then explain how to be faster by considering that some letters have few words and that you can try to guess where that word would be.
It sounds stupid, but it was an essential skill in primary school. The teacher always pointed to the dictionary and asked to read aloud ^^
And sometimes, during read-aloud, the teacher would stop us and ask us what we read. Then, ask about difficult words and ask to use the dictionary. So the teacher didn't have to waste too much time. If you were too slow to look up, you would be taught repeatedly, and the dictionary would become your close friend.
The very same with tables ^^
Fast forward to today, kids don't exercise those skills, and there were many instances I had to guide people to use train timetables! They do like kids, reading from the first panel to the last 🤦🏻♂️
And when you step away, it's indicated if it's workdays or weekends. Then, getting closer, you see the hours in bold. Then, in smaller prints, you have the minutes.
And people are confused because they don't string that information together. They miss the bigger picture.
Even recently, I saw students challenged by z-score tables.
Even synoptic tables with rain per m² are harsh to read...
But even worse, synoptic maps! You would think that a highly abstracted map would help since your only concern is finding the start and end stations and then following the lines to find the suitable exchanges. Nope, too difficult ^^
So, it's expected that most people can't use schematics.
All the people who had to use log and trigonometric tables and the dictionary and the atlas were given a precious gift!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@HealthyDev I am slowly leaving the field to be a math teacher after 12 years!
I saw companies of all sizes and the result is that I am not a good fit for that field. On top of that, being a math teacher is my dream career. I was held off by lower wage and profound disrespect and disregard for teachers, but I burned out once and ditched too many attempts to take advantage of me.
On top of that, I am an expectation breaker. One could think that being fast and good on the job can be a big plus. No, that means having to be careful to not step on others too hard because that's too easy to do it inadvertently. This alone promote a toxic environment.
A stupid example of that is remarks like: "Why don't you help me? It will take only 5 minutes of you.". Except that if everyone start to ask you 5 minute help, then when are you gonna work your part ?
I had the finger on this for decades and though I had probably a too big opinion on myself. Then I got involved on a project with a friend who dared to told me: "Be careful, if you go too fast, I'll look really lame and that's not good for me". Luckily, we do things that are different (I do embedded and I didn't do that for a decade) and I can BS that I have been trained to do exactly what I was doing (Which is true as I learned industrial computing) and that I am gifted, so really quick to learn. (But a lot of people do not really understand what "gifted" entails. It's all theoretical and they are way smarter!)
Oh, and don't forget the avoidance game when someone says something along: "Nah, you can't really understand it and come up with a solution that quick. I took months to get there". The honest answer is "Well, I process information much faster than the average human, have a greater working memory which enable me to work with higher level abstractions". The answer I give is: "Oh, yes, I probably missed something. Let's see next week".
And when fed up, I ask a "run through" and confront all along :-D (we all break down at some point!)
It was weird for 12years, I don't want to pull that for another 33 years! Time to shift and it will take 3 years as I have to go through a new curriculum while working.
3
-
3
-
3
-
I was a ward of the state and was assigned a room with a future trans. I was a adolescent and he was still a kid with feminine traits.
When I entered the room, I heard that he tried to hid something, after a few times, I caught him with a pant on his head to make long hair and he started to pull it down. I told him he doesn't have to, that I don't care and will not annoy him with that. So, he felt quite safe to pretend to be a girl in the room.
He ended up partially transitioning and I met him in the train. He had a good image of me and I was happy to see him years later. Yes, surprised by the change ^^
It was like "now he looks happy" and it was quite a satisfaction. Even got me a solid laugh, because a friend was shocked.
It's really bad to coerce kids in any way. If a boy want a doll, give the damn doll. They have to try things, that's how they actually learn. Some kids will indeed end up transitioning when adults, nothing wrong with that. What is way too wrong is forcing kid to transition or having them transition on a whim. Just let the kid experiment, getting to know their body and when they are adults, then they can take a sound decision and be very happy about it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@KnockManJo Capitalism is nothing more than a decentralized democracy system.
Here is how a decentralized democracy system work:
Any member of the society can voice as much as he is involved in moving the society forward.
That means that if you stay in your corner and say nothing, you can't say anything.
On the other side, if you bake bread, install plumbing, build houses, interpret laws, etc.
Then you receive tokens you can use to vote on what you want to be available.
As it is a democracy, you can't decide alone, many people need to desire the same thing.
Though, if your really want something over everything else, then it's still possible!
So, you don't even have to rally to the majority, you can also content yourself.
Now, keep in mind that it is not sustainable and most of the time, it's much better to see how other spend their tokens as popularity of something tend to make it more affordable. (less token needed for that choice)
This token based voting system is ingenious because it has a decentralized nature and allow everyone who contribute to the society to vote anonymously!
That's the CVS: Capitalism voting system.
BTW, I am a ward of the state who moved is ass and worked hard. Now I have many tokens as a reward for contributing actively.
I even give some of those tokens away to open source projects. Around 25% of a month salary per year as a basis.
3
-
3
-
3
-
47:18 A decade ago, we needed some authentication. I wanted something more serious than BasicAuth over TLS, so I implemented WSSE.
100% of implementors were confused because they didn't understand how the website could verify the password was valid if they sent a hash.
On top of it, the documentation stated that the password had to be based twice. So, you had to ask for the salt for a specific username (the website would return a hash even for nonexisting users).
Then you had to hash your password a first time with the provided salt, then a second time with a timestamp and nonce you created.
If you used twice the same nonce in the same interval (5 minutes), the website would reject the authentication.
When I left, the company abandoned it to use BasicAuth because it was too complicated for implementors.
Another huge point of confusion was why Basic Auth was wrong, even with HTTPS. People couldn't understand that HTTPS is not enough. So, I referred to an article from Microsoft about naked bikers ^^ Yet, people still had trouble wrapping their heads around. But I was persistent, and that's why we did WSSE.
The big downside was that I was the only one to know why it was done that way, even if I tried to educate my peers. It was already too complex.
It's not. Check "hmac," and you will see it's straightforward. It's just that, at the time, people were not used to that kind of security, and there were no plug-and-play libraries.
3
-
3
-
So, I am.
I proctored uneducated people who scored very well.
One guy flunked the math part, because they didn't knew what √³ meant (and it cant be explained during the test).
At the end of the test he tought he was low IQ because he couldn't complete the first series.
When asked the other parts, he said that those were quite obvious. You just had to look and the correct answer was easy. As we discussed, I understood he thought it was just a test of speed with different visuals.
I had candidates who were engineers and raced the first section, then were stumped past the few trial items.
So, scores seemed quite detached from education beside for the first series.
And it happens that the first series is not that important. It was added for completeness allowing a bit more of variability.
The training effect is limited to your actual potential.
People who get a boost from training are people who gained confidence.
On top of that, training can be impeeding. One famous example is the diagonal trick for RAPM. Except it can fail and some items test for that!
Top IQ is biological.
As an example, symbol chasing required good eye-hand coordination and this is regulated biologically by the amount of myelin you have. That amount is more or less fixed.
It's also why fMRI could be used in the future instead of IQ tests!!
Now, your IQ can be lessened if you don't do sport, don't eat properly, are very anxious, are tired...
But education does only a little.
Biology > Context > Education.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@troodon1096 We used to learn in school that if the question is wrong, then you rewrite it at your advantage to have an easier time.
So, it was nice when you were able to outsmart the teacher ^^
The other side of the medal was that if you weren't able to answer because the question was bad, then you got 0.
Even the "but you said that" was punished as it was clear that the teacher is not always right. So, it was our duty to be able to check possible mistakes. Some teachers even went that far as playing practical joke on students writing mindlessly by spitting out gibberish for few minutes then asking student to read aloud what they wrote, unless one student started to laugh because he realized what was happening and stopped tacking notes.
It was part of the curriculum to make us independent and autonomous.
Now, it was harsher than today, because you cold laugh with the teacher and the next second, the teacher would tell you to get back at work without much transition. Some people had hard time doing so and were often punished as a result. (Hard for a 8 year old to have fun, then being told to stop having fun and go back to work in an instant, but it was part)
So, you were taught to also be obedient and that would fuck the head of most people today. It's what people would call selective obedience. We had the ability to selectively obey blindly while keeping full independence and autonomy. Like, in the classroom, questioning what the teacher said and what he was asking, while being able to obey blindly about getting back to work or using specific layouts in our writings.
I also think that this requires some intellect that got lost due to led being in food and drinks for decades. Luckily, it's wearing out and the next generations will be better off.
3
-
@cobramcjingleballs No, most parents lack the qualifications. Very few people even understand what vaccines are and even well done videos can't help. You have to remember that we are not equal when it comes to ability to think and process information.
So, the state has to intervene for a bare minimum to ensure society do not get harmed. It's the very same reason people get incarcerated. It's not for punishment, it's to protect the society as a whole.
And that's the last bit, people with cognitive disabilities have hard time thinking about well being of others while they will claim they are open, warm, caring and altruist. Cognitive dissonance is not a problem to them as per the lack of proper métacognition.
As an adult, we are not forced to get vaccines. Though, we are well informed about span of a vaccine (every 10 years for ROR); And also explained the "herd protection"). You can still say "no", get sick or be a passive carrier and put others in danger.
As a kid though, for their own protection, basic vaccines (ROR) are mandatory. Same, they do not get injected without control... And that's a professional doctor who will do that. Parents have nothing to say. Also, note that even if they are doctor, due to conflict of interests, they have to refer to a "blind" professional.
All of this may be though to understand, so, the easiest to remember: as of today, vaccines are safe (in a clinical sense). When they are not, as in my case, it would be hard to get a shot in any respectable officine.
(in the past, that was not true. White from eggs was used and it wa an alergene. All these susbtances got quickly phased out. Also, note that in this example, it is even something natural which gave a bad reputation to vaccines: EGGS!)
2
-
2
-
2
-
In Belgium. we have an average of 7% yearly inflation. Wage index is roughly 3.5% and taxes are rising.
Without change, half of the population will definitely be under poverty line within the decade.
(70% decrease in buying power over 10 years)
The last two votes results were dismissed, it's why we ended up for years without a government.
Democratic vote is effectively dead since two decades; At this point, we should not be forced to go to the voting boots.
Our welfare system encourage companies to hire people who were unemployed the longest.
The corollary is that if you get unemployed then you are guaranteed, by the same mechanism, to be in for a long time.
The country also promotes career changes, but only if you can prove you don't have the credentials.
As an example, I work in IT field and we need higher studies diploma, so I am barred to ask help for switching job.
On top of that, happens it's a penury job (jobs people don't want to do), so it's another thing that forbid me to ask help to switch.
Rents are going rampant too, Brussels try to stop it by having landlord write down the expected renting cost. But at the same times, try to lure people buying their house/apartment cheaper if it's owned by the state. (So, you buy the use for life)
Of course, those three last years didn't help.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ThatDangerousBacon If infinitesimals is a bit a spice, Cantor's proof is...milk 🤣
Here is a mind bender that shows how twisted is infinity and infinitesimal.
Go through each statement and decide if it's true or false, then draw your conclusion. You may be surprised. All True/False are bound to the Euclidean plane.
1) Two segments, whatever is their length (not infinite, otherwise it's a LINE), have the same number of points. This is shown by appropriately project on segment on the other.
2) An equilateral triangle has three equals sides. Hence, the sides have the same number of points (easy one!)
3) If we color points from a segment as such two neighbors do not have the same color and using to colors, extremities (first and last points) would be of the same color if the number of point is odd and of different colors if the number of points is even.
4) If we color points from a segment in an alternating fashion, point at the same distance from a center (circle) should have the same color.
5) In an equilateral triangle, lying implicitly on a circle, the 3 vertex have the same color
6) An equilateral triangle can fill the plane by growing, filling the plane with nested triangles, the trace of the vertex is of one unique color if one triangle vertex is fixed.
7) An equilateral triangle can be rotated and the vertex do not flip color (variation of 4)
8) The plane can only colored with one color.
Enjoy!
2
-
I have occasional loss of my body awareness and with the years, I ended up being able to know when it's happening. Then I can avoid accidents by simply waiting it goes over. If I am holding something like a hot beverage, I quickly find a spot where I can put it down etc. Very effective!
And yes, when I had to walk to work a grabbed a coffee, I would put it on the floor and it looked weird! But much better than pouring it over me or squeezing it and burning my hand!
The irony is that overall, I have better control of my body ^^ (like doing weird hand position, moving ears, shaking eyes, reaction time, fine smell & taste...)
That's quite possible that you will develop that 6th sens one day! One of the trick is to just not care about others, another one is to quickly think about what happened and if you felt something. (develop self conscientiousness/awareness)
Now, such accidents became really rare! Still spill glass on my desk, but the desk is suitable for that!
2
-
@BreakingJP83 Don't worry, your reply was on point. You gave a reasonable cause. It's what we call IP (Intra punitive). My answer was a mixture of IP' and EP (IP'=false intra punitive where the subject seems to blame himself, but justify it by EP). Though, I did really try to get through to no avail.
So, your IP answer was the right one, it allowed me to confort my own answer.
Also, the transaction is Neutral as your answer is basically "let's dismiss it".
So, that what I would call a text book example of good communication, even if it didn't produce something positive, it didn't generate something negative.
If you look this whole thread, it's overly negative. A lot of E and E' answers! But that's the Internet way (funnily, that's an E too).
What you want is N type, but it's not always feasible. and E+I doesn't yield N ^^
So, do not worry, at least, objectively, that was a neutral transaction.
And within this thread, it is just "noise".
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@VesperLoveReal In lower, you are tested against arithmetic because that's a main objective. Then it becomes a requirement, then it becomes acquired.
In some options, like electronics, the student is even encouraged to make arithmetic error and stuff like 10+1=10 is perfectly fine as we do know the student made his life easier. Same with assuming a quadratic is a linear equation because locally, it's good enough.
Then we look at the error margin and if it falls within allowed margin, then we don't care. Why ? Because some components have themselves a 10% margin and tolerance is even higher. So, the answer has to be wrong enough before it receive a zero.
When I was a student, I passed statistic without calculator and we worked on a relatively big dataset (hundred of values). I computed everything by hand and explained at the top of my copy that I didn't had my calculator. So, for each item, I did put the computation in symbolic then the estimator I used and how far away I may get from the answer. The teacher gave me good marks and was impressed.
I applied the same method we do in electronics ^^
Key point: understanding.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Nope, I worked in a private office and it was gold for productivity. Much less interruption, because people had to walk around and open at least two doors. So, instead of asking me things every 5 minutes, they thought more about the issue. Even the questions I ended up with were much grounded!
I have also worked in open spaces and it was just shitty. No way to do your work properly. Even had colleagues playing and chatting although they were not the top performers.
In one place, I was QA and I asked that the IT team was moved in a dedicated room, because performance was not great. They felt liberated and produced more as a result.
And in another company, they broke down teams in no more than 5 people. So, it was a smaller open space with desk far apart, yet you could easily talk over to each other while having complete privacy. And the boss was purposely on the other side of the floor. Reachable, but you needed a walk ^^
So, it's a bit more than private office, it's about employees dynamic. It's stupid, but having an employee to have to take a long walk to reach the boss permits to the employee to give a last thought (walking does wonder) and most of the time, the boss is not asked anything ^^ It's why a lot of floors are shaped like donuts with bosses on one side and staff the other side, with cafeteria in the middle. It's a design which allows employees to take a walk and bifurcate to the resting area instead of going straight to the manager. It also help with flow and shuffling people. It was a way to enforce bonds. Newer spaces are failing in that aspect.
2
-
2
-
Also, "3", like with words, is both a symbol (digit), an ordinal (signify a position) or cardinal (signify a quantity of things).
Where it's also fun, it's when looking at "1+2+3" and wondering what "1", "2" and "3" means in that expression.
We can see "1" as being an initial state, "2" being an added quantity and "3" being another added quantity. Which explain why we can replace "2+3" with "5" as adding two, then 3 is adding 5.
1+5=6
We can also see "+2" and "+3" as specific operations. In that case, we obtain a new state for each step.
1+2+3 = 3+3 = 6
And this distinction IS important. Kids start with the second intuition. They build up their answer by concatenation. So "+1+2" is NOT "+3", but "add 1 then 2".
Later, when first abstraction kick in (addition tables), kids will still do in two step.
+(1,2) -> 3 (lookup at intersection of row 1 and column 2, found 3)
+(3,3) -> 6 (lookup at intersection of row 3 and column 3, found 6)
Then the last abstraction for most people is using the associative property. So, understanding that a train of addition can be done in any order.
Multiplication is also following the same path. From concatenation, to repetition of a sum, to lookup. It's why younger kids are baffled by 1.5*2. This makes no sense to repeat something 1.5 times, so the scheme has to evolve!
The subtraction is also an issue, because it's also follow the same evolution of "+", with a little detour as seeing it as the question "What do I have to add to obtain the first number".
So 8-3 is first worked by removing 3 times one (counting backward), then by asking the question "?+3=8" because it can be looked up (faster and lazier than counting back!)
But the division really takes the first prize. Because that's the first time where all primitive strategies fail. So, it's solved by asking "How many times does the divisor goes into the dividend". And that is answered by repeated addition first, until we get a number too high. Then it evolves in repeated subtraction and yield the long division algorithm.
In a funny way, the square root is always a curve ball to students, because that the first time where there is NO other way than asking "what is squared to get the number".
So, faced to "sqrt(4)", the student has to solve "x*x=4" and does so by plugin in some values.
For most people though, schemes will stay quite primitive. It's why even adults can be confused by a problem like:
In the following expression, replace the letters by whole numbers to satisfy the equality: 2÷a+3÷b=13÷6
Yet, it's quite easy to find proper values for a and b once you know division properties. But if you've a primitive scheme, it's an insane problem 😉
Note: primitive is NOT derogatory or an insult. By no means it entails that people are idiots. Schemes evolve with need. Someone who never have to develop a complex scheme will not, regardless of his intelligence. For a scheme to evolve, it has to be confronted with something that doesn't fit in it.
One example is the scheme of seeing multiplication as repeated addition. It works well in N (positive whole numbers) and if someone never work in R (real numbers), then he will not evolve his scheme, because there is no gain to complexify a scheme that is working. It's even possible to have a scheme midway. As an example: "-3×4" throw a stone in repeated addition. What does "-3" repetition means ? Take away 4, 3 times ? And so, the scheme evolved to repeated addition and subtraction.
But hey, what does "-3×-6" means then ? Take away 3 times the take away of 6 ?! Makes no sense ^^
But hey, if "-6" means step back 6 times and "-3" means do the reverse 3 times, then I would move 18 step forward. (Another scheme and it works in R too --e.g. tacking half steps--, but break in C!)
So, on the surface, math seems obvious. But hell it is not!
Note2: Not everyone have the same schemes and not everyone follow this scheme development. As everything in psychology of development, it applies to most people. Not all.
2
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5usDonc c'est par hasard que j'allais à la bibliothèque pour étudier les mathématiques, que je me suis inscrit dans un mouvement de jeunesse et scientifique et quenj'ai fini bénévole dans les 2, alors que plus démuni tu meurt?
Je vivais en institution, je me suis fais passé à tabac par des grand qui trouvaient ça drôle. J'ai vu un touche kikine organisé que j'ai dénoncé, un gars qui enculait des poules, un autre qui avait carrément installé une console et une TV dans le poulaié, un édicateur qui enfomce la tête d'un autre gosse dans un radiateur et fout tout le monde dehors pour joueurs aux jeux vidéo. Une stagiaire nymphomane, une éducatrice qui frappait avec ses talons, un édicateur qui soufflait dans les nez, une éducatrice qui nous faisait manger des rester pour donner notre repas à ces poules...et en sus de ça, on devait nettoyer, faire à manger, la lessive pour la maisonnée (17 enfants). dans la première maison, om avait de l'eau qui ruosselait sur un mur et des fenêtres quinme ferment pas.
Dans le village et les écoles on partait avec un gros handicap. Pauvres on ne pouvait pas se payer le matériel et certains profs nous punissait pour ça, d'autres nous traitaient comme des délinquants (ce que la majorité était dû a des troublea lourd).
Malgré ça, j'ai fais ce que quasi aucun fils de riche ou enfant de la classe moyenne n'a fait. En 2002, je vulgarisait la physique quantique.
Mais à la place de semer la terrur et la destruction, j'avais décidé que les maths, c'est cool. Nez dans les livres que je pouvais emprunter, nez dans mes carnets. Visite de psy car je faisais trop de maths ^^ (mais pas pour les plus grands qui avaient défoncé la toiture "par ce que c'est drôle")
Directeur qui détournait des fonds, directrice remplaçange qui s'y est mit après quelques mois.
Un éducateur avait même envoyé mon dossier au Rotary Club pour le concour de la meilleur évolution dans la vie. Exaequo avec un gars qui avait perdu une jambe pendant la guerre.
Et diagnostiqué autiste étant petit 😅
Le seule chance que j'ai eu, c'est une intelligence supérieur.
Je peux passer des batteries de tests complexes voire intractables pour la personne moyenne, mais je ne sais pas gérér qui doit ouvrir la porte quand on est plusieurs...mais quelle chance 😅 (Maintenant si, avec quelques règles heuristiques données par la psy ^^)
J'ai aussi eu le titre national de champion ".net" alors que je travaillais principalement avec PHP et Java. J'y avais été "car je pourrai profiter du buffet et voir le HQ de Microsoft".
Et tout ça vient de quoi? Du fait que j'ainpassé 90% de ma vie a résoudre des problèmes et apprendre des choses qui me dépassaient. Pendant ce temps là, lea autres cassaient des choses, cassaient des gueulent, se branlaient 😂
Donc je suis ultra conscient que j'ai travaillé très dur (même si je ne l'ai pas sentit comme ça) pour pouvoir aujourd'hui entendre une personne parler de ce qu'elle aimerait faire ou d'un problème et pouvoir y répondre dans la même conversation.
Beaucoup de hp n'en font rien. Ils sont excellents à l'école jusqu'au moment où il faut bosser et ça devient la dégringuolade. Souvent passer de 10 à 8, parfois l'échec.
La chance, elle te donne des opportunités, encore faut-il les saisir. Et nous sommes dans des pays ou même un malchanceux comme moi a la garantie de pouvoir saisir une oppprtunité. Tu n'as pas idée oh combien l'accès gratuit aux bibliothèques est un havre quand t'es en bas de l'échelle. Un endroit chaud, bien éclairé avec tout un tas de livres sur des sujets variés, t'as qu'a en ouvrir un pour apprendre. Un truc de dingue quand tu y penses. En libre accès!
Donc aller me sortir: 《T'as eu de la chance et tu cherches juste a valoriser ton parcours pour en faire un exemple》, c'est juste énorme.
Je ne souhaite à personne d'avoir mon parcours.
2
-
2
-
2
-
In the past, our most famous telco was using "from". So, the advertised speed was not fantastic, but still better than competitors, because everyone used "from" and consumer took that for granted. I mean, that's the logical way to do it.
Last decade, shady providers changed to "up to" and advertised insane speeds. Especially the TV network. So, they had a bad reputation, because their technology QOS entirely depend on the number of active users and even weather! So, in summer, they got a lot of subscribers, because the weather was nice and most people were away, Which means that new subscribers had insane speed. But during fall, those at the famous telco provider laughed their ass, because their lines still went at the same speed regardless of number of people or weather (that's the joy to have PTP).
But the TV network just pushed it through and were able to scam more people, even having dirty clause in your contract so you are engaged for a year or pay huge fine.
So, the famous telco had no choice, they launched few sub-companies with the same shady practice, but those sub companies lacked proper support and the brand name. Didn't work so well, so the company itself just jumped in the band-wagon and also played dirty.
Even worse, that famous telco dropper his support! (They still have a support line, but these are unqualified people running through scripts at ALL levels. Even L1. So, you end up having to call a technical department where it's a few guy not used to the exercise...and that's if you know your way in)
The other shady move was to go from MB to Mb.
The ISP world is dirty AF ^^
Oh, and more and more ISP do network shaping too.
As for wages, when I had to find a job, I asked the salary and a lot of recruiter kept it as a secret. You had to run through the interview, sometimes even doing tests, before knowing who is the real client and how much he is willing to pay. The trick is to ask the range, then if your expected salary is not even within it, just move on and explain why.
Good to ask, because you may devalue yourself. And if they ask, just tell and say that this is your minimum, no concession. And that If they can't accept, it's not worth to pursue the interview.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
In my Taekwondo training, we also worked on inhibition. Because you get so much trained to do complex moves on a whim, that you may actually do some dangerous moves just because you thought about them. I had that exact problem with a best friend who did hit me a bit hard and my response has been to slam him on the floor and lock his arm. It's when he yelled out of pain that I realized what I did. Took a mere second to be in that situation and I wasn't even able to describe how we got from both standing to him on the floor with my knee in his back.
I remember that the very first pomsee was a pain to memorize and quite technical. By the third, I had the kinetic vocabulary, so it was much easier to learn and remember. Instead of thinking of individual moves, I was thinking in combination of them. Much, much lighter on the mind!
I did a technical competition with a guy who wasn't prepared at all. We were really pissed off, because when you start your routine, you assume everyone will do it well. So, it's very hard to pull back when you see the guy coming toward you instead of going in the same direction. You can be hit very hard! An yes, the guy didn't had a second chance. (And it was stupid for the organizer to bring that guy in our duo at the last minute)
2
-
2
-
It's a liability to hire women, too.
I did recruitment, and I was required to be accompanied by a woman for interviewing women.
Someone on X explained that it was due to liability. Women can sue the company for improper behavior during the interview.
A woman on X added that women in the workplace can make false accusations if they see someone looking like another who may have done something wrong. (she tried to argue why it was men's fault that women were more expensive to hire.)
Even without the differences in how men and women work, that alone is a considerable risk.
That means that the woman you hire has to be remarkable.
On top of that, men are much more represented in the tails of the bell curve. So, if you want to fill a position for a «big brain, long hour» kind of job, your best fit is a biological man. At least, according to sciences.
Also, something rarely considered is that one woman in a male team is a disturbance. Men tend to provide, even in the workplace, leading to less output from them as they take on part of the job of the female employee.
So, there is too much against women in some workplaces.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
When I worked for the state, I made a deduplication software. It used Bayesian inference, and I found unintuitive things like there are more family names than first names.
So, if you grouped people by family names, you ended up with smaller groups than if you grouped by first name.
It's counterintuitive because you usually call people by their first name and rarely notice collisions. But you would be better off calling them by family names to avoid collisions. Which means that family name is a better discriminator. Better than date of birth.
So, I had to write a paper on how the data is vectorized, fed to the deduplicator, and then restored. That paper was just unreadable because of the mathematics involved in the biases (weights).
Summations over set theory and Bays.
I didn't know how to make it simple without making it a thousand pages, so I wrote a few formulas, explained some observations, and made a table showing step-by-step what happens to a pair being compared (even if the software doesn't compare teams, but that's a very high-level view and in the end, that's kind of what you would do).
The manager looked at it and told me it was convincing enough. I asked if he understood the formulas, and he told me: "No, but that looks very impressive, that will do."
All he needed was that it looked correct and good, even if nobody understood it. 😂
He was a good manager because he prevented me from doing stupid things and focused on the technical part of my job.
One day, I was writing an email to show how provably stupid a higher-up was, and that manager ran to me to say not to send "that" email.
His first word was, "Don't send it" and then he explained the politics around it and that I should ignore it and do something else instead of sending that email and possibly getting fired.
We could have done a mini-series about what happened there; it is just unbelievable ^^
The most comical one was when I was tasked to prepare some load tests, then I ran one iteration and got a direct phone call asking me to cease testing because servers went down. The real test was 50k times this with a slight ramp-up and cool-down. However, the test was too fast to send the data required to register a pupil. ^^
The load test was canceled, and it was fingers crossed in the hope school would not rush to do it on the last day. Organic smoothing. (That didn't happen ^^)
In big companies, there are always some idiots who are too important and don't want to listen because they know better, and that lands pretty well for interesting situations.
2
-
+Jack Harper, no one is an authority unless it suit you. I am not, because I am speaking of my bad experience and the ones of other people. Louis is not, because as a repair shop, he mostly sees the negatives.
Reviewers, I mean people paid for it, aren't either because, well, they are paid.
Independent reviewer either, because they have their mind.
You neither because you fall in any of the above.
Who is left ? Nobody, but the market. The market says apple is good to buy, hence apple is good. Much like it happens fireman cause fire, because where there is fire, there is fireman. Between sophism and causation bias we are not done!
Here is an unbiased view: all problems depicted in the video are consigned and reproducible. Thanks to the WWW, apple attitude has been transcribed many times by independents observers AND fanboys!
This remind me of another company: PC-Soft (WinDev).
2
-
2
-
2
-
Also, the distribution of IQ plays a role. Not everyone can have every job and people end up not being employed because they are just inept. So, they live on the welfare system with assistance of social services. In Belgium, we have 4 levels. A being someone able to repeat a simple task after training, B someone able to do a complex repetitive task and take minor decisions (call for help, switching task), C someone able to use knowledge to achieve a predefined agreed objective, D someone able to create knowledge and defines his own objectives. A lot of Belgians don't even know about that, because even if their class is on their pay slip, if they are A or B, they are don't show the curiosity to understand the meaning. This explanation of classes was just to show that the employees are classed by the state and companies and it impact the salary. (Pay scale)
I've worked close to A people and it gave funny moments where the instructions were not clear, so the job was a mess. Once there were A4 folders to be put into boxes, but that was the wrong box reference, so they folded the folders to fit ion the smaller box. Destroying quite a few before the supervisor saw it. While the supervisor yelled out of frustration, the blame went on her. (That's the perk of A level, not being responsible VS level D where you can be fired very easily.)
Below level A are protected workshops. Those workshop are funded by the state (companies get compensated for employing challenged people).
And the bar to be employed will only raise as both fluid and crystalized intelligence is more and more in demand. For instance, in my job, I need to solve problems AND learn people businesses. I have to communicate solutions in jargon used by the trade. (Analyst-Developer)
So, there will always be a need of solidarity, even without public infrastructure and utilities.
As for monopolies, free market deal really good with them. Monopolies have a weak spot: their scale. They can cater less to specific needs (niche), so, smaller businesses can chip it.
The issue with monopolies arise when the state is involved. In Belgium, the TV operators pressed to disallow fiber on the facades. So, the state disallowed it, forcing FAI to dig the ground. Without intervention from the state, the TV operator monopoly would have been taken down. Same with taxies who asked to have a limited number of licences, so they can have control. (And recently, Uber did some big noise!)
The state has to be the smallest possible and just ensure that contracts are honored, goods are safe to use/consume. But if someone want to sell bean for a thousand a piece and there are people willing to buy, the state should not intervene. Same with the example with TV operators, if they can run a 5mm cable on the facades, then FAI can run a 2mm one too.
And for those thinking AI and robots are the solution, oh boy, we are lucky to only see the beginning of the transition ^^
2
-
2
-
The standardized test always baffled me when I interviewed, some candidates did object to the test not being suited to them! I even had management on my back because I gave a question inspired on a problem we had on the job and that I fixed in 5 minutes. It was deemed too unrealistic.
In another company, I had a black candidate who felt I took him for his skin color and went as far as asking if it played a role. The guy missed a lot in the test, but did show great potential and did great on the job.
I had a girl who thought that being the only one did qualify her, even if beside that she had a great personality, she had no real competence and didn't show potential.
It's really fucked up for recruiters!
And the quota thing is not a joke, we had to hire people on the basis of race, religion and handicap. Totally illegal, but required by law to hire minorities. As a result, some people are hired to fill in a quota and those people end up knowing it one way or another. And when it's not minorities, these are unemployed people that were fired because they were inapt, but the state pay half their salary...so management like them as hires as it gives betters figures.
It's why my interviews always followed a protocol. I.e. it's scripted and the whole interview is summarized by a number.
The nice thing for the candidate is that he gets the feedback on the spot.
This has been used in the military (not by me ^^) and did beat experienced recruiters who went with their guts.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
At some point, they will rename Kotlin to Java and get done with it ^^
Also, I have yet to meet one single programmer who understands OOP.
OOP is wrong because it needs to be easier to understand.
When I was a QAM, all dubious code attempted to leverage OOP, leading to tight coupling, lava code, action at a distance, and side channels.
And when we talked about it, I had to ask, "Why do you need to know what it was called? Why do you need to know what it will do? Why can't you rearrange those unrelated statements?"
With Kotlin, you can easily create data classes, have first-order functions, have extension functions, and have delegation facilities.
On top of that, there is a misconception (shown in the video) that objects eat up memory. The JVM is excellent for dealing with short-lived objects! And with JIT, code that is well written will end up reasonably optimized. By avoiding creating too many objects and methods, people prevent the JVM from doing its work. Sometimes, pooling is just combatting the JVM.
And the issue lies there; one has to know a bit about the JVM.
2
-
For those who never filled taxes, yes, you can declare loss in various way and if you don't, your'e an idiot or uninformed at best.
When you run a company you need, for the smallest ones, do a balance sheet. The tax is then mostly applied on the difference.
(mostly, because there are goods who can't be declared as expenditures, same for some services, then you've also partial deductions, like when you buy a building)
For personal income, you can do the same. On my expenses, I have my mortgage and even money I put aside for my retirement. Because it's money I can't use right now, I can put it partially as an expenditure (30%).
So, if you don't know, hire someone once to explain you the basics and you may have much more money in the end.
Also, depending on your state, you may even be able to pay early to have some deduction. It could be the safest placement, even if the interests are low. At least, something to consider.
2
-
2
-
2
-
I like how people resort to "multiple intelligences" as an excuse for someone to be dumb in one of them...and totally miss the point that those are linked. Only geniuses are the exceptions (individuals talented in one intelligence and average or subpar in others, those are rare).
If you're bad at maths and trivia, chances are that you're quite average at best in interpersonnel, kinetic, musical, natural etc...
I know it's not representative, but if you take a test on multiple intelligence, you would see that on a scale of 10, there is about 5 points between your high and low. So, if you get a 10 in mathematics, your lowest will be a 5 (average). Some people will not follow that pattern, because stats ^^
Also note that the further you go from 5, the least common you are.
Now, deducing other intelligence from one of them is though, because you can indeed test the one which is the valley of your subject, or the peak. If you hit 5, then you've no information.
If you hit 0 or 10, though, it's a much less risky business. And by testing only two of them, you already have quite a high confidence.
https://academicjournals.org/journal/ERR/article-full-text/FBA5FF057170
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ninjaphobos We had an American working in the same office and he was far from movies. He mostly spoke in slang and that was funny, because I understood a lot of it while colleagues were quite puzzled. When I did not understood, I just asked him and he "translated". My colleagues were shy to ask ^^
Those were really great days.
Obviously, this quickly broke all preconceptions I had.
Another funny thing with America, is that this is a country, but for us, a country is roughly what you call a state. So, I often see people puzzled by American diversity when they are faced with it.
Another funny thing is just the sheer scale. New-York is roughly Belgium population 😅
Or there are the thing that are much less known, like how cold it can be between building towers.
What makes it extra confusing is that you have some unity that EU does not have in your culture due to the language itself. It's like you've a culture at federal level then at state level.
Another one are people mocking Americans who can't locate France or Germany. But they can't locate Florida or Texas in USA ^^
Then there is the confusion with calling American citizen of USA, since America is the continent. And often, America is used in lieu of USA. So that fosters a lot of confusion ^^
It will not change, because that's not easy to grasp ^^
2
-
@SuperNova Gaming Swearing is also in expression palette.
The issue is swearing just for the sake of it. I seldom swear, but when I do, I mean it.
So, for people knowing me IRL, that's always a surprise and a reason to worry.
I also make use of colorful language for effect. When I say something is "shit", it doesn't means it's bad and I didn't like it. It means I am comparing it to the fecal matter. When I was QA, I did say some work is shit, because it resulted in huge maintenance, security issues and much more work. That was what I called "negative work" (not counter productive or improductive, but destructive). Had me swear a few time and you knew you'll get fired.
For really bad work, I just sat with the developer and ran through his work and explained what's wrong and discussed on how to fix it.
And if you screwed, but it was ok-ish, I did just highlight it and explain the reason, letting you to fix it. So, very different way to express my concerns on someone work ^^
And it's important to use vocabulary correctly, because if you abuse of one level of speech, then it becomes normalized and lose its weight. If you constantly swear, people end up taking it as your baseline and good luck to try to convey that something is unfathomable or utterly unpleasant etc. Same if you are always using joyful language, good luck to show you really appreciate something. It's why it's good to learn to use bland or neutral language. So, all deviations are noticed by others. It's much harder than I make it appear, I am learning this in my studies, so it obviously bias me on the matter ^^
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
First year in school: Compute the volume of a cone...in assembly!
Most student were blocked on the division!!! That's when the learn overflow AND underflow.
I do not remember the in and out, but the division gives you a good ride if you didn't pay attention to the curriculum.
Then that's when you are doing your work that you realize that registers can be split in different way, that there is a flag register too.
At that time (15 years ago), there was "help PC" with nice explanations of all of this...
Another difficulty of assembly is that it's "verbose". In higher language, "if" is identified as is. In assembly CMP+JNE,JEQ,JZ,JNZ,JNP.
And even conditions with conjunctive or disjunctive becomes challenging.
Another nicety was using the stack for local variables instead of trying to guess which register is safe to use ^^
It's a bit cloudy, because it's far away now. But that wasn't that easy! It's a gymnastic on its own!
But overall, whatever is the language, programming is really complicated.
It's all about solving problems and expressing the solution as code...And most of the time, the problem to be solved is also to be found!
2
-
I am a computer language polyglot (language lawyer at this!) and it work as he explained.
I learned languages that are very different in nature (what we call "paradigms") and that makes it utterly easy to learn new languages since concepts are already sitting there and I am only hooking syntax to what already exists.
As a result, it takes much less time to learn a new computer language which is close to one of the family I already encountered.
Now, there is a downside to that. When you know many languages, mix-ups happens and false memories too.
You may remember a feature that was never, just because of proximity.
Also, computer languages have versions and thing can change and do change between versions. So, that just make it a little trickier.
But another plus side is that when you learn many computer languages, real understanding comes with it.
There is a point where you are able to understand design decision (reason that gave that specific shape to the language).
And it gives a big edge when you need to communicate with a computer. Instead of trying to shoehorn your solution in an inadequate language, you can chose the language being the most efficient or in which you can be very expressive with your solution.
On top of that, it becomes possible to do a "paradigm shift", which means thinking in one way then translating it.
It's something that can be very difficult to grasp for one who didn't do the journey. It's worth it!
2
-
When I was in primary school, they didn't segregate subject yet. So, you had two parts. Morning and afternoon. Both 4 hours sitting.
The exam was a booklet with seemingly random texts, various figures and then a list of questions. You had to use knowledge spanning multiple subjects just to solve some items. And some of the required knowledge was buried in the texts.
I remember an infamous question where you were asked the frequency of a dragon fly flaps and in the text about the dragon fly, you could read that it does a full flap in x seconds. So, you had to convert frequency to period length ^^ Stupid question, but mostly badly answered. The relation between frequency and period was given somewhere else (mind that we where 11 years old and not yet exposed to ration and real physics)
The exam was too hard and got replaced by folders targeting each subject individually so students didn't had to read the whole thing multiple time. Also, 8 hours of exam is now considered inhumane, so they have breaks and only half days.
And yes, it was rough, because even the teacher discovered the exam and the questions were quite different than those from the teacher. Now, this is simply disallowed, pupils can only be questioned on question types they already saw and no new material can be introduced within the test. Also, questions have to be self contained AND without sub items.
So, it's way more easier now ^^
At the same time, at 12, you were considered quite autonomous...That was the goal of primary school, full autonomy. It got pushed to the end of secondary school.
2
-
2
-
2
-
Yep, when I worked at logica (circa 2008), I got a bulky Lenovo. Other consultants had very thin laptops from HP or apple.
In 2008-2009, I was using Eclipse (A memory hog) to develop in Java (At that time, it was a memory and CPU hog) and I could enjoy a video while comparing code of two projects and dealing with code versioning (SVN at that time). And of course, I had a local web server "servlet enabled" with a local DB.
That bulky was very powerful and even had the ability to destroy data (password protected and ability to blow the hard-rive).
It had something called 3D secure/protect. If the PC received a choc or fast acceleration, everything would freeze to protect the data and hardware. With that model, if it had to be replaced, data was definitely lost. So we had to ensure everything was backuped. (Which was done by the company at that time)
So, definitely, a business class Lenovo is maybe not the best gaming gear, but it can take a lot before giving up.
I have no idea how they fare today tough!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ed_iz_ed That's not the same.
Synchronous and asynchronous are different from concurrent and parallel.
For example, when you use emails, you use an asynchronous method of communication, but it's not done in parallel.
For example, processes were concurrent when the CPU didn't have multiple cores. So, one process that was not yielding (purposely or because of DMA, IRQ...) would stall the computer. So, programs had to yield while doing crunching!
Now, we have multiple cores that can do things in parallel; GPUs also work in parallel.
When using "aync" in JavaScript, the code may or may not run in parallel! So, you can't even know if it's parallel or concurrent. But it definitely looks asynchronous! (well, you can see if you know what is the event loop)
So, you can NOT use those two couples interchangeably.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
For models, they don't always replace other models. The can also be concurrent models, being useful in some situations and not in others. Newton models works well with human scale, but useless at the smallest scale.
Still, much more practical to use Newtons mechanics to build bridges or ballistics.
Also, when you look at the table of elements, you can see the little X with bars and dots. Those are useful models when you need to write down a semi-developed formula. So, still there, still useful, even if not the most accurate model. (it's even very, very limited!)
That's the beauty of sciences, two models can compete given they are both valid and show good prediction capabilities.
I really don't like the "one model get replaced by a better model", because it's as simplistic as "letting a void something else can fill".
2
-
2
-
Exception, you also need "mirror neurons" to ease interpretation. The flip side is that you can usually recognize people by their demeanor miles away, even if you can only see the silhouette while normal people don't.
And of course, it has a huge impact on social life as you don't pick up cues passively. You may for example speak for 10 minutes straight without seeing that your interlocutor want to say something. You may end up timing yourself and actively looking for cues or letting blanks in your speech to get people to speak if they want. In the beginning, that land for weird situations to which people don't know how to react and this, in turn, is some noise in your learning ^^
That's quite an handicap, but in the end, you develop strategies and that includes cold reading ^^
This also lead to what is called "masking".
Now, you may also be describing emotion numbness: https://www.healthline.com/health/feeling-numb#causes
That's obviously another ordeal! For that one, it's important to consult specialists!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Children are not racists, they are tribal. It's an essential component of our species survival.
So, if a kid never saw someone with different features, he will be very cautious.
Kids raised in a multicultural develop a bigger tribe.
That confusion between racism and tribalism can only be on purpose. That's so easy to understand!
Tribes are totally normal. That people prefer to be with alike people is totally normal. etc.
What is abnormal, is to have grown up showing racism behaviors. That is, acting like someone who believes that one race (now, to be replaced by ethnicity or skin color) is superior.
Tribes also play a role in modern society, it actually permits communities to develops (community = tribe), by having an internal organisation. As an example, we have a African neighborhood were there are shops that are rare in white and Asian neighborhood where we also find things that are not even available in other parts of the country! In those area, you've supermarkets that do not feel like your typical supermarket. And the prices for some esoteric goods is way down. Why ? Because those supermarket are fulfilling a big local demand. That they regroup could be labelled as racist by idiots, but it's tribalism. They regroup because they are alike.
And of course, when you get in those shops, it's a cultural shock the first time. You see things you never saw and you smell new odors and also, people speak some native languages you rarely ear. (On the Asian market, they aren't even fluent in French and I already had a friend telling me they were rude because he didn't understood that the cashier couldn't do better -- so, no friendly small talk as we are used!)
I am also part of a tribe who like to discuss serious subject. I brought a friend in and he said they were pretentious. Also missing the point ^^
So, we should really stop throwing racism left and right and explain the pro and cons of tribalism. Then we can treat people showing a racist attitude properly!
2
-
You are also being deceptive by cherry picking 47:03, you focus on the encumbrance of vehicles, but that's not what autonomous cars solve. Traffic jams are also due to the simple fact that someone brakes for no obvious reason, then then next one take a bit of time to react and stop. All those little times add up as such that someone far away has to wait minutes. When the first accelerate, the "wave" has also to propagate and that can also take minutes. Just because one guy did brake. Autonomous cars can just send "I am braking" and that message would go much faster (almost speed of light). You can consider all the autonomous car as one big car.
At crossing, you have the need for traffic light, people have to assess the situation too, even in a roundabout. Autonomous cars don't have to, they can just quickly find crowd sourced solution in a split of a second and even pass few cm from each other at good speed.
The thing is that you don't do it to be deceptive. You just can't make a 10h video and you can't have a rebuttal which takes into account what you ignore. It's unavoidable. Those who reply "then get educated", well, that's not that simple, there is more knowledge than the time someone has. Even experts have big holes in their knowledge because of that.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I went to a Cambodian wedding and I learned the dances AND participated AND had people guiding me all along.
And by people, I mean native Cambodian.
There were laughs, because I was not proficient, but there were no outrage.
I even went to the pagoda to share a meal and I was the sole white.
Children were the one looking at me with interest and grown up didn't disrespect or exclude me in any way.
I was just welcome.
I also went in a restaurant which is exclusively Asian, the thing was empty and my friend told me than in few minutes, it will be filled like crazy. Then a bus of Asian people came and we almost had to share a chair ^^ No real privacy when you eat! He wanted me to see that.
Another thing is that they DO fat shaming. Everyone that everyone should be in good shape. So, they will make remarks if you're overweight, have long hairs. It's not to be taken badly, they don't mean it in a mean way. And work, work, work. Another funny thing is that one of the mother showed me her girls in a book and asked if I was looking for wedding. Because I should already be married 😂
2
-
2
-
2
-
1:17 50 years ago, we didn't had to say that an iron can't be used on clothes we are wearing...Neither that "Steam can be very hot".
People are becoming dumber and dumber...Yet, most student can compute a derivative or invert a matrix.
In Belgium, IQ test are illegal in recruiting (unless you are Selor, which is an organism used by the state). So, no problem, I gave a small math problem to future developers. Developers are mainly problem solver, that's the JOB. So, simple math problems should be a piece of cake. Yet, too much failed and some argued that it was math, not code.
But also, some people are not that idiotic, it's just that they never learned to put their intelligence to good use. So, it remains pure potential. Quite a sad situation.
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Because of taxes, I was able to live in an institution. Get fed, educated and not roam in the streets.
I am born in a family where the mother try to kill the father and also prostitute herself and steal the man.
So, the state took our family and by doing this helped that father too. The father did even pay extra to ensure his children will have a decent life.
Because I had not to pay for basic education, I could graduate. Now, I am a Quality Engineer!
I do not own a car, but I pay for the road. Well, people paid for me. When I will be older, I'll be happy to get help from others. I am now paying for my future and for current elders!
I am even strongly taxed on water, but tap water is drinkable. I can visit anyone here and drink right at the faucet!
And because schools are still detached from corporations (sort off, got lucky on that one), I was more or less taught independence and criticism.
When I had to do in a foreign country because of excellence in Sciences, I got everything paid for me! Without that, I would have never get any reward and accomplishment. Without that, I would have been a lambda.
Taxes are a way to distribute to the community. It is mandatory because a lot of the infrastructures is used by everyone.
Some countries go even further: they apply a base tax and calculate how much you used an infrastructure an bill you accordingly! Some lower wages can't afford these extra and are unable to take on opportunities without making a loan to travel across the land!
Lastly, we have an imperfect TAX system because the richer are far less taxed. (It's a proportional with a ceiling)
Though, we have also some favor the the poorest. (We ignore a part of the wage for TAX calculations)
Taxes are a really good system when well applied and explained.
As for education by corporations, it was like that before. Then corporations cut through education because it was expensive. Having someone who is asking questions or even sitting near an expert can be very costly. Sending people to schools and requiring schools to offer more diversified training were far less expansive! Hence, professionals left the private sector to teach in schools !!
Now, you are suggesting the reverse ? Then start teaching people as it is done in technical school : invite them in your shop, give them a board and tutor them !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There is a simple "flow".
- Do I know how to ?
- Is there any reasons to not do it ? (e.g. consequences of error is life threatening)
- Can I find support ? (e.g. Google, phone call)
- Is the client "ok" with extra time ?
If you work with a small company, you have to be even more professional
in the sense that small company owners can overlook a few things
and even ask for illegal stuff because they simply ignore it.
(e.g. filming employees in some countries)
So, it's far beyond "plugging a monitor".
It's even about knowing what lies around and is not technical.
(e.g. laws and regulations)
Other times, the client thinks he got a clever solution and simply passed by
a more cost effective solution that fit the bill!
If one wants to be a limited expert,
one should work for big corporations where inputs and outputs are clearly defined.
To come back to that video, I got quite the reverse.
I was helping a friend for his presentation and wee needed to hookup the computer to the projector.
One guy was there to handle it. I told that I was OK doing it, but he was there for it.
He hooked the cable and I didn't felt the need to check it.
After few minutes of presenting, I moved a bit the computer and no more projection!
The VGA was not tied correctly! (It's quite hard to not tie it correctly as you should screw it...)
Programmers also behave like this. They are not analyst, they are not builders, ...
Last time I did a repair, my friend thought it was quite hard and he couldn't do it. (Swapping parts on an electronic key)
Comparing to apple boards, it's level 0.001 ^^ (lot of rooms and very few discrete components)
+rossmanngroup, you may be smarter than you think ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kit1128 I was going to say that it was too much of a fine...then realized it wouldn't impact me :-D
Probably better than what we have here.
Some bottles have a fee in the price and you get that back when you return it properly.
Other bottle do not have an extra fee, but if you return them you get some small cash!
The latest option is a nice touch because there are homeless people who collect bottles to get some money. So, it is a very good thing!
But it's a balancing act, if people start to be irresponsible because there will be an homeless that would take car of it, it can be very damaging and even start to cost (in a literal way) to the society. So, the big fine is a good one.
Now, I usual, I see the enforcement throwing a bottle and giving you a fine for it. Though to prove that you didn't do it.
A lot of ideas are nice, but hard to implement.
In UK, they have camera in parks and someone watching them. The guy can even speak because there are speakers. There is not a fine per se, but there is the "Hey, the guy with the brown pant, do you think it's normal to litter. Can't you do 10meters to throw it in the bin. Please, behave and take it to the trash". Bet people think twice to do it again.
They have also "horse police" who doesn't fear to say to people what they did wrong. And the guys looks down at you as they are on a horse. So, it is a bit impressive too.
This is much better because it put shame on people for shameful behavior. Act like a kid, be reprimanded as a kid in public. A fine, you can recover. Shame...well, it takes time :-D
The obvious downside...well there are cameras here and there and you don't know which are recorded and which are monitored live.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
18:40 Children have under developed brains...So, compared to adults, they are stupid. That's why you take more time to teach them and that you teach them things that are very basic.
As an example, basic reading (most common words, very few syllables) is done over 5 years. Holding a pencil is taught during 2 to 3 years!
Basic social interactions like being polite, respecting other people, listening...It's almost 9 years.
To be able to add 1/2 to 1/3 without much troubles, it takes almost 13 years!
And then, in one year, they learn how to invert a matrix, add vectors, compute a ball trajectory etc.
It just that the brain is not fully developed before 16, so they have an hard time and some ideas are too abstract and symbolism is not fully present yet.
And some adults, enough to be highlighted, will never acquire ability to abstract and it's usually a non issue as those people most often chose a more "down to earth" job and are happy.
Of course, some kid do have a more developed brain and sometimes, better developed than the average adult. But those are quite rare.
I had a 12 year old who once asked me how much I was paid for my work (I was teaching kids to code on a voluntary basis). I replied "nothing" and he went: "But you could be paid for it, right?". He was puzzled. That kid pulled a plat-former using Scratch using vectors math... Great intelligence for his age, but a brain not totally formed, hence such disparities.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Ryan91487 I am a bit German on those: standardization.
We perfectly know that Asian, Black and Idian (yes, I know, Indian are Asian and Black is not an ethnicity) have very distinctive biological differences and thus different needs. Especially in drugs.
Yet, we blatantly ignore those differences.
If you take black people, they are black (or "non white", maybe that's more descriptive), because they have more melanin which do affect drugs! Asian are more prone to not being able to process lactose, which also affect some drugs (Especially the "wrapper" of drugs).
And even food can be an issue for Asians due to lactose intolerance.
So, only tacking 3 different cases, we already see complications. It's not even accounting cultural differences... Like Muslims not eating pork and some Hindouists(?) not eating beef for religious reasons.
Of course that brings troubles by putting the system under pressure! Yet, people ignore that.
As a stupid example, it's too expansive to cater to all religions and believes, so, school cantinas simply banned pork...vegan just eat the same stuff without meat (Quite sub-optimal) and if they are lucky, a protein rich alternative is proposed (but rarely).
The funniest thing was that in the early '90, we served beer to kids. That wasn't an issue at all, until we became more inclusive. The beer we served was very healthy, it was "piedboeuf" and it didn't even taste like a pilsener (think "Jupiler") or a special (think "Orval"). And there was less than 1.5%. (for kids, it was under 0.5%, but amazingly, it's not to be found on the net!) Rationale was that if the kid didn't eat, he would have at least something in the stomach. Keep in mind that school was tougher overall.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I almost died two weeks ago. I went to a shop I seldom visit and saw a new juice drink. So, I picked it and went home.
Then I drank the whole think and my throat became very dry, but I also had a running nose.
It was so weird of a thing and so sudden that I thought it my be an allergy, so I took the ceterizine box and it was empty.
Next thing, I ran to the pharmacy and the pharmacist told me to wait 2h and go to emergency if it doesn't improve.
Back home, I take the medication, but I feel odd. So, I decide to go to the emergency waiting room "just in case¨.
Five minutes later, I was with a needle in the butt cheek, because I was gaping for air, my throat closed.
Luckily, the jab did act quickly and in few minutes I breathed. Then the baxter was setup and I did aerosols.
I had to stay awake 12 hours under close monitoring because it could came back at any instant if the products failed to suppress my immune system.
After those 12 hours, I went back home with two strong medication which suppress the immune system (So, you can´t go out)
If I did listen to the pharmacist and waited a bit, I would be dead at home. Luckily, somehow, my mind knew I was going to die before it aggravated. And luckily, I listened to that odd feeling.
1
-
1
-
I am a bit salty about Belgium who was providing France and Germany in the '80 and known to be visible from space (we had to light up all road to spend energy we couldn't sell to neighbors).
Now, we can't light up every road during the night and have to buy from France and Germany...
On top of that, France is going with micro reactors while Belgium is still falling for greenwashing. In few decades, we won't be able to heat our houses (yes, we are encouraged to buy wood pellets in Belgium, to use "biomass" for heat). We are going backward in many ways. Even for democracy. Vote results are being discarded, so we have to physically vote, then the government just void the result and proclaim their own... In few decades, we should expect to be a country which provide a lot of cheap labor. We already raised the retirement to 67 a while ago too. In Brussels, they are rolling a plan where the state own the housing, so people can "buy" a bit cheaper, but upon their death, the housing go back to the state.
In recruitment, you are not allowed to give IQ tests, but the state is obviously allowed to do it (Selor).
At some point, France will build a wall.
The worse in that is that I am used to Belgium and we have good healthcare and "safety nets". So, that's tough ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@BGgungame It's easy to understand, even for a ward of the state like me.
People either live with their parents or with a bunch of other people to share fixed costs, like rent and mostly utility bills.
When they have enough aside (a few months of full autonomy), then they transition to a career job.
When they are settled in their career job, they can move on to be fully independent.
As a ward of the state, it was a bit different. Though, I ended up sharing housing with a friend while I was working a low paying job, then moved out when independent.
I never understood how people can't grasp that they can't go straight to their own apartment and need to do it in steps. To me, it appear stupid to think that one would be able to afford a full rent from the get go, unless he has rich parents or some kind of privilege.
It's like thinking that you just need to think about repairing a car to be able to fix it. Sadly, too many people think like that. I can't count how many people told me "I could do your job" without even understanding what it is. The worse being those believing that anybody can do anything given enough time 🤣
People want to work minimal job wage, because they are more numerous than expert jobs. They are there, readily available with high turnover. Some are even stepping stones to have a foot in the targeted company. They are low skill and accessible too, which means you don't have to develop specialized skills that takes years to master. So, those are very enticing. Especially to get started in life.
1
-
1
-
Also note that journalists do not have a great command of English. For instance, they would say "not true" instead of "false", "incorrect", "misleading", "wrong", "dubious", ...
Weirdly enough, they can have a verbal diarrhea when it comes to speak of others. Then the most "descriptive" adjectives and nouns start to be used. Really weird how that works 😉
The good part is that by being able to identify that language, you only need a few words from a journalist to know if he is worthy of the title, which spare a lot of research work. They may adapt to that strategy, but they will probably not as this is their main tool.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In smaller communities, there are also chances police is more lenient and even siding with population. Not because the population outnumber them, but because they form a closed community.
In Belgium, there are villages where the community is so closed, you realize it as soon you enter the village. You literary have the feeling you are not welcome as a foreigner!
Then when you know someone...you know everyone! Not a joke, people know your name even when you never saw them because people just share information.
I lived in a village and whatever you did was known by everyone. When I was told that in big cities, you should not say "hello" to everyone and that most people do not even know their neighbor, I didn't believe it. Well, moved to the city and indeed, I was that huge weirdo to whom people frown randomly.
The mentality is really different. At the same time, in a big city, as an individual, we have much less footprint. In the village, all actions had a great footprint.
We had some moron who decided to throw paint on the door of a lady next to the station, next day, everyone saw that! Few days in, the guilty one were found. Not because of police ^^
Then they got punished and had to repaint the door. Again, not by the police. Though, calling the police was the menace.
You do that in a city, the guy pull a knife, stab you and continue his route ^^
Now, I don't have to walk 3km to find a shop and if I want to see a movie at the cinema, I don't have to ride a train for 45 minutes....
All of that to say dynamic is totally different. Sens of community too.
1
-
1
-
I hired and whatever was the person, if he was good, he was good.
I hired a guy who couldn't even write in PHP (programming language). On top of that, the guy came VERY relaxed (short and tongs) to the interview. Thing is that he was gifted and learning the language was a mundane thing for him. He did an exceptional work after only two or three weeks.
Another guy, black, wasn't able to write Java properly (another language) and he was asking for mobile developer job. His English was abysmal. Yet, when I asked few questions, I saw he was very smart and that he could do great with proper guidance. He did deliver.
And yes, I always ask followup questions to ensure I am not getting things wrong and that entail question like "Do you know the name of the company". I really had to ask that one in presence of the CEO who looked at me like "are you mad?". The guy butchered the company name :-D
I had people who were fantastic with which I clicked and had to say "no". So, not always easy. And that's why I summarize people as a set of numbers. Those are easy to compare and not subject to feelings. It's also why, beside some followup question, I follow a protocol written in advance.
Too many* recruiters do it with their "gut" feeling discarding their own psychology in the process and their training...if even they got one; We are easily influenceable.
*euphemism
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
11:30 Habituation. When you film a classroom, you always think the pupils and teacher will act differently. They do, but if you do it for a few weeks, they revert to their true self.
People seem to "forget" at some point, even if you say that you will turn on the camera. Even if the camera is in the sight of some pupils, you must move it. And even if you remind pupils that they are filmed.
It's bizarre, but it's how it goes.
So, the takeaway is that when you have a visible camera, you do not try to make it more discreet.
You just fake filming for a few weeks. After that, you can do whatever you want ^^ Magic!
It's also why cops do felonies while being filmed. The same way people commit felonies and film them with their dashcam.
If you stream, you must set a ritual so your mind knows you must switch to your persona.
Not necessary for the first time, but very important for the long term.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Standardized tests are a good thing. Notice how Belgium is above USA ? That's partially because we use a mixture of teacher assessment and standardized assessment. So teacher can adapt the curriculum and test on what they taught, but they also have to ensure the basic material is covered too, as at the end of the second, the assessment is standardized.
That means that not everyone learn the exact same things, but everyone has the same foundations.
When I recruited, I also used what we call a "protocol". Each question is rewritten and each stimuli/guidance is also scripted. So each candidate will have the same guidance, if required. Even type of wrong answers and associated questions. It is done that way because the interviewer can have its own biases and memory is a bristle thing. Then the result is summarized as a unique number that can be used to order candidates regardless of gender, religion etc. And yes, there are candidates that were hyper stressed and there is room to handle that.
That may sound weird, but in the end, you want someone who is capable. At least, capable of the bare minimum. Someone who can actually learn and imagine solutions to novel problems. And quite important too, understand said problem. It's even why there are wordy math problems in the curriculum where the solution is in the text!
We also introduced a "formative" testing. Which are mock tests. So students get also used to the pressure and get a first view on their knowledge and can remediate with help of the teacher. If you pass all mock tests, the real test is just a formality. And on top of that, we have "exercisation". Which is where student are left alone to solve a set of problems with few curve balls and the teacher is only there to give explanations and do differentiation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Anya Wale Positive discrimination is the most divisive and racist thing. I have professional experience in dealing with it.
I had a black guy who flunked the technical part of an interview for internship. He had a broken English, which made it quite hard for him to read documentation (written in English, because that's how it is in IT).
But (yes, always a but), when I give technical tests, I don't really care that you know all technicalities. It's an excuse to discuss with the candidate and see how smart he is. It's illegal to IQ test candidate in my country, but totally legal to have them solve small puzzles or think aloud about a problem. There the guy showed a great mind, lot of potential. Even his traduction did show that from they few he understood, he tried to make something that had some sense. This by itself is a difficult task. So, I said the interview was done and that I don't need to see other candidates as he is hired, just have to accept. His reply was: "Are you taking me because I am black?". It wasn't a joke, it was a concern. He thought he was a tokenised.
I had to explain he did show potential and it's an internship where he will LEARN, so it was ok to flunk technicalities, now he had 4 months to improve and show off in his memoir (paper he has to write for the end of the year).
As expected, he did a great job with proper guidance and learned a lot. So, a win for everyone.
I also had a girl who was happy to be selected, until I told her that the fact that she was the only girl didn't ensure her a seat and that, in fact, she had to improve a lot before being hireable.
So, yes, positive discrimination is everything but positive. That girl sit on her ass, knowing she will be hired for being a girl... And she's right, she probably got a job on that basis.
This deserve minorities a lot, because a lot of minorities end up being tokenized and people who don't even know about that end up observing that "Ouch, those people sucks" while in reality, no, it's just that there is a represntation bias. While in the population, minorities are the minority, at work, they end up equally represented. So, companies have to also accept the worse. And when out of 3 people only 1 do good and the two positive discrimination hires (tokens) do shit you've to cleanup, ressentiment is real. Also from minorities who simply got hired on "Ok, that guy is fantastic AND a minority. It's Christmas!".
And those perfectly know they got hired on competence and positive hires are also quickly shown they were positive hires where they are given easier tasks and pampered to avoid too much arm to the company.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
7:15 Well, well, well, I canceled Netflix when I spent much more time watching Trump vs libs and all the election fraud happening live 🤣
It was very entertaining to see people being sent back home, then vote being counted under the table (yeah, literally). Computer who had a bug that seemed to only favor one party... The company (dominion) which fled... the FBI being caught, a lying colonel. Much, much better than most movies and shows.
And in EU, all of that was ignored, so most people had no awareness. Only lefty things did percolate. So, I had extra fun explaining the main things and seeing people being clueless about it. "Ah yeah, I am well informed" oh, so you know why they blocked window in the hall 🤣
Now, I am waiting the part II : Trump returns.
There is the other thing with Trump vs Twitter that is funny as heck too.
1
-
Back in 2009, there was a shortage of employees in IT...Or it is what was said. The reality was that there was a shortage of cheap IT employees. So, people with a good level in IT (at least, bachelor), just did other occupations! I did apply and was dismissed for being too expensive and a liability as I could easily do job hopping. Rightfully so, job hopping became an issue with people who accepted cheap offers because they couldn't get better, then learned a bit on the job and started job hoping. So, the situation was dire for IT companies as the workforce was there, but too expensive. To counter that, the state funded centers where you could be a developer in no more than 6 months. Companies hired to guys and it fired back. It took a decade for companies to understand that someone doing programming for 6 months is nowhere!
Still, I did saw companies which started big projects with a team of juniors 🤦
Oh, those centers still continue campaigns of disinformation like "You don't need to be intelligent, just hard working" , "Requirement to be good in mathematics is a myth" etc. And people do believe them, because they teach the ABC of computing and in the eye of untrained people, it looks like rocket sciences.
One no so stupid question I asked in interview is to design the "hashCode()" function. When you know what it does, it's a stumping question, because not only it's its own field of study, but on top of that, you need to know the usage pattern! So, there is not universal hash function, just "not atrociously bad ones".
And obviously someone who got a 6 months training will not wonder if a bloom filter will improve an application or if he should implement columnar data to gain CPU cycles through vector operations (SIMD) and avoid too much cache busting...
Even when you finish a bachelor, you are not sufficiently trained. What you get from the bachelor is a solid overview and a good understanding of that overview. So you know what you don't know and can start to learn. When I did my internship, I did 100% of nothing I learned at school, besides learning to learn 🤣 and then wrote my papers on that, checked by teachers and specialists who know that. And that's how they validate. I've seen people crying and sobbing because they couldn't answer questions they didn't study for. You've to contrast that with a 6 month training focused on implementing a project. So, student learn to do that specific project.
Writing code is the mundane part.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why do seniors tend to forget that code is written for being used?
We use Java because the JVM keeps stats on the code being run and can prune code that is seldom used, reorganize conditional so the hot path is the one that will be continuous in memory,
JVM will also do escape analysis so you can create objects; the executed code will not have those objects.
You can't write "fast code" because pattern usage changes. You want something that can monitor its use and rewrite it.
In that sense, everything that is compiled AOT is "slow." So, C is slow according to that standard.
Using C would be shooting in our foot on a multitenant system, where code should espouse how it's used.
Unless we can see that, for some reason, the software is always used in the same way, then we can beat the JVM by fine-tuning.
To better understand, it's like stating that a drag race car is faster because you always used it in a straight line.
Then someone else will tell you that the Veron is faster than the drag car because when there are a few turns, the drag race car does shit.
Then someone else comes with a panda and tells you it's much better in the city.
That's compiled languages.
Now, imagine a car that could do all of this because it would see that you're in a city and reconfigure its cartography and the type of tire to suit the environment.
Now, the downside of that car would be that sometimes, it would be adapting, especially if you are in a continuously changing environment.
Luckily for you, the environment doesn't change that fast in real life. So, you would beat the 3 other cars.
And sure, those cars would kick your ass in the first few seconds for a given task with a specific usage. I think the trade is worth ^^
And for those at the back of the room, this doesn't argue against compiled language. This shows that each has a specific use.
And so, no, it's not always a skill issue. It's a seniorism issue ^^
1
-
"own it" is really the best advice there.
I am back to studies and I could see that stuff at play. We were asked to read an essay. About a 20 minutes read.
When the lesson started, the teacher asked what we thought about the text and it was obvious one student didn't even bother to read the title. Instead of owning it, he started with "but ...".
On another lesson, I overlooked that we had to read about something. Then teacher asked point blank "have you all read the lesson ?". And I went forward and apologized that I overlooked it. Guess what, it was fine because I do not have to apologize at every lesson and this can happens (we have our full time job to do too).
In my work, I deleted data on production server and a friend was sitting next to me. When he realized what I did, he shat in his pant and I kept cool. I sent an email to the boss saying I did a major screw up and was already working out a solution. Sure, the boss came in the office, yielled, threw the equipment around. But a week later, I got an apology and a raise. I kept cool, we got thing fixed. That's all that matter.
If I didn't owned it, then it could have been a month or even year length issue when each client realize, in turn, that data is missing. By owning it, we recovered most of the data and the impact went from huge to small.
And of course, I don't delete production server every day.
If you feel you can't own it because you make the same kind of mistakes every tile, the you are not learning! If you can't learn, you are not putting yourself in the right situation.
As an example, I don't drive. I tried it hard, asked to friend to observe me and I was a wreck. Well, I simply avoided driving althogether. Yes common transports sucks. Yes, I see people freedom with their car. But I'll not smash my car in a kid, biker ...
"own it" and act accordingly!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
11:47 Well, you can and it's even useful. You can believe two contradictory things and even have two contradictory mental models.
Compatibility is an extra cost that the brains often neglect for his own good. The brain is very lazy and take shortcuts.
What makes is difficult to understand is that shortcuts can be very different from one person to another because their brain ended up favoring a specific structure.
When teaching, it's very important to understand this as that means there is no universal way to teach. That's why big classes are a big problem.
A classical example is with kids:
- Student: Of course, age can't be negative.
- Teacher: Then why didn't you try to correct the answer ?
- Student: because that's math.
Another great example is people knowing that everyone act on their own will, yet using their own experience to predict other behaviors.
It's the belief that everyone has their own behaviors, but at the same time, behaviors of others are the same as ours.
Or the belief that everything will stay as it is for millenniums, while acknowledging that everything change in a snap.
And the weaker you are mentally, the more those contradictory beliefs occurs. It's part the "low consumption mode" of the brain.
On top of that, there are situations where it's too painful to lean on one side, so the brain go through insane hoops to make it compatible.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Don't skim this comment (skip if no time), vocabulary is not advanced, but the subject is tough and can be emotionally disturbing.
In general, men stats are more spread and women stats closer to their respective mean. That means that if you look at the big picture, men and women have the same average intelligence, but there are more intelligent men AND more dumb men too. In other words, it's more dangerous to pick a man at random, but may lead to a better reward. That is very confusing to feminists as they seem to only see the big picture and chose their data-points.
It's the same with size, except the average of men is a bit higher.
For humor, it's important to see how people were selected. There is probably that skew I'll explain further.
And here is THE confusing part: dumb people are not that interesting for our society. So we tend to skew our views by only looking at the right side of the curve. Doing so, it gives that men are more intelligent. (works with size, weight, political compass ...)
It's also why when we look at achievers (top end of the curve), men are more represented.
And this is where people are going full morons! In reality, while those people mater, for the layman, that's really people they will deal with that are important...those in the average. Which means that statistically, you are more prone to see a dumb/intelligent man than an average women. Which in turns means women should be easier to work with (as assumptions are more prone to be correct as representation bias has less effect as you'll mostly see someone average. Not true for men as you may see a group for dumb/smart men and be skewed), but our society is working really hard to not allow this to happen, especially through 3rd wave feminists.
Note: if you read all this as "women are dumber", it's a sign you are clearly on the lower end of the curve or should read again.
TL;DR: no, read the full thing. There are too many subtleties to summarize a partial summary.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DoCLov I have only 13 years in the idustry, but also routinely joined gifted programs. That's why I indeed know about code that is isomorphic. That's something you only learn in advanced classes and no experience can really get you there, unless you are a purist. That's why I wrote that blindly adding tests and educating people on this makes much more harm than good.
I saw quite a few projects tanking under big tests with project managers happy to say that they write 99% of test and 1% of code. Not even seeing the issue. Also, they actually never really refactor, because the cost was too great and new features requires a lot of reviews etc.
I have also seen companies you would probably laugh at with your 20 years of experience, but who are very agile and have really good tests. A few, very high level ones who don't care about inner working, just about in and out.
When I was a junior, I blindly wrote unit and functional tests. Vastly ignoring UC tests 🤣
Few years in, seeing those companies, I realized I was an idiot. When refactoring, I also had to refactor tests. When working in those companies, I seldom had to fix the tests themselves and it clicked.
As for isomorphic code, I learned the fiundation during CS then I researched on my own to give a talk at the university I studied a few years later. That's the kind of process you need to use for software going to the moon and in some industries. Also, my formal training is in industrial computing, so the code we can deploy can kill hundred of people. Now I work in "management systems", but the same apply for code that is less crucial. I.e. If I can rewrite code that is proven for a press, I cam write code that is proven to list some rows from the database ^^
I am trying to leave the field, because things have changed too much and overall, quality did lessen and I have hard time cutting corners and testing was never enough to me.
Just to give you an example, most developers totally ignore that they can document preconditions, postcoditions and fixed points in their code and have them checked at runtime while testing. (when releasing, that code is not even executed).
On top of 12 years, the only time I read such assertions was...in my own code! Worse, I even had colleagues "cleanup the junk".
So, yes, programming has changed a lot. It will kick in for you in 10 or so years 😁 Also, it depends on your formal training. If you did CS in System Management, then a lot of the "purity" is removed as in the worse case, code you produce will crash a site or application and not cut the hands of someone.
I wouldn't be able to back to IC as I probably lost quite some skills as it's very close to the metal too, and I switched to SM...but that "quickly" pissed me off ^^
Now, I am still guilty of writing unit tests. I do that when the code I am going to write will be complex and never touched again. ("never" is highly relative here)
I also write functional tests when the feature can be kept standalone for much faster iteration. At that point, the functional test is almost a UC test.
But for sure, if you write a unit test, you've to have a better reason than "to detect a change of behaviour". Good reasons are complexity, not being intuitive or overly used. And even, that last reason is dubious as good UC tests should spot it. Otherwise, that means you've code independant of its input...
Another good use of UT, is when you've juniors or third party. Coupled with CI it give them a good feedback.
It really boils down to cost of maintenance and wethever it's worth. But UT are usually too closely mirroring implementation to be useful.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Also, companies became more closed. People owned their hardware and it was open to modification. Datastructures were also documented. This is still prevalent in Linux.
In 2008, I ended a bachelor in Computer Sciences with major in industrial computing. We learned EXT3 inside out and for NTFS, we only had what was reverse engineered. And for FAT32, a big part of it was open, but there were some secrets too. So, obviously, EXT3 was much easier to understand ^^
We also had to learn about modules, again, in Linux, that's the literal name and anyone who can write a bit of C can replace a kernel module. In Windows, good luck!
And we are worse with Apple today...
So, there is the scale, but also the behavior of companies that changed.
To top it, I was close to bare metal in my studies, because of the major. But very few people can afford that major because it's though. It's basically the equivalent of "all you can eat" (it offers most of the content of the other major AND add the hardware part to it). So, 99% of students seldom get taught about hardware itself and they can't easily learn on their own.
As an example, I have a friend who can't grasp bit twiddling! It's already too low level. So, he can't get what is an half adder or pipelining or even make the distinction between multi-threading and parallelism. He can "just" write some nice algorithms which are generic and under use the hardware, even killing CPU caches out of ignorance...and that's perfectly fine as people can wait one microsecond more to see a web page ^^ So, he really see the computer as a black box that can be programmed to do whatever he want. (almost)
And timescale is different. When you are on a fpga, few microseconds is slow (thing "run" at femtosecond speed).
When you do an SQL query, few milliseconds is slow. When you load a page, half a second is slow ^^
In automation, a split second can save a split hand ^^
So, all in all, that's quite normal.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chucklindenberg1093 Yes and the 11 gave quite eloquent example of that when we were able to hear people exploding on the floor and the journalist asking what was the sound placidly. I was a kid and my hearth going for a ride and I couldn't even believe that such question was just asked.
I am back to school to be a teacher and we are trained to remove ANY possible non neutral communication. Even saying "the nature created" can be seeking for troubles. We are required to have our face fully visible (so, long hair tied) when practicing so teacher can see our expressions clearly as we can only show expressions that serve the lesson. (You can of course smile to a pupil joke, but it can fire back if that joke is biased as your smile is an approval)
I know that, as with teachers, a lot of journalists are not trained an come from various background by necessity. But normally, that's the kind of training they go through.
If you listen to how they speak, you should notice they speak almost in the same way...as if it was part of the job ^^
It's just that actors have to do it at another level, so it's easier to catch them off guard. (they have to posses a character and do complex acting, so they are deemed to fail slightly)
To top it, there is a bias of representation, The few actors you saw that failed to conceal their real feeling did mark you more than all the other who were bland.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@typingcat Well, programs change. And sometimes, a lot of material get changed.
Also, what we teach is a very small part of what we have to learn. As an example, im Euclidean Geometry, we will present the circle as "round", while in d1 and d∞ it's looking like a square!
As an example, probability is phased out and statistics is introduced.
We did calculations from left to right, now there are order of operations.
Scalen is not anymore synonymous to "any", but to "with no particular caracteristic".
It's also why teachers have to routinely go to update training ^^
On top of that, remember that teachers are teaching kids that have to go to school. Not kids who enjoy school, have to.
If a teacher do a year without updating, he will teach old material with old methodology.
Now, compared to business analyst in IT, where you've to learn the business of each client to offer right solutions, yeah, it's much less learning. Consider that a lot of people fail the studies, because they think it's easy, then have no methodology, are hearing about psychology for their first time etc...
In internship, I had to put dowm two fights and there were no warning signs. And you can't punch the students 🤣
You've to solve the issue right there, right down and in record time to continue your lesson.
Most people thinking it's easy would last 5 minutes before telling gibberish and having a fiesta in the class 😁
1
-
@typingcat Lol, it's not how it work.
When you teach trigonomotry, even the best start to complain as the material is hard to digest. So, you can't skip the material, because you know only 1 out of 10 will be genuinly interested.
This morning, I had a reminder of alll the trigonometry taught in high school. The teacher told use that because the subject is hard (you have Taylor and Fourrier lined up), if we fail that "chapter", it automatically fails us for all other chapters. They had to do that, because students (futur teachers), just skipped those classes knowing that acing the other chapters would not make even a zero in trigonometry noticeable.
As a teacher for kids, you can't do that, though. So, you have to male them invested in trigonometry. Even if that means that you will teach how to make a simple video game and sneak trigonometry ^^
Also, don't forget that teacher teaches 4 years. And the programs change for every years fairly regularly. And you don't teach 1st graders the same way you teach 4th graders. Entirely different dynamics. And when you change school, you have a new culture to integrate. Some school will tell you to be more lenient and have a focus on some moral values. Other will focus on strict obedience and performance, letting the morale to be determined by the pupils (so, you are not even allowed to say something is immoral, but you have to provide the tools).
The things is that it's more social than technical, qualitative tham quantitative. So, from the outside, it's hard to understand the difficulties ^^
And also mind that a good teacher is standing up and moving around for 8 hours.
Also, classical error, you focu on material. But the pedagogy and methodology dwarf it ^^
And schools have different pedagogies. Some are active, transmissive, participative, flipped, project oriented...
I am an analyst developer, learning to become a math teacher so, I know about both ^^
1
-
@choronos In one company, I gave a low ball estimate of about 2 years to complete a project, based on a very optimistic projection. The manager didn't like that at all. And because I took extra care to evaluate the project runtime in the most favorable conditions, he had no leeway to say that I did a bad job. So, instead, he lied and asked other people to lie.
Because I was ready for hostile work environment (as a consultant, that happens quite a bit that you land on a very bad customer and it can end your career really quick!), I had a software which took a screenshot every 10 seconds (TimeSnapper) and tag which application was in the foreground. I also took the time to annote the time frames, so I had an idea of why I took breaks and which tasks I was doing.
So, the company decided to do a "confrontation" in seeking some compensation. I replied that all they sent was lies and that I would be very happy to provide the recording. The confrontation was swiftly canceled ^^
In another company, they tried to gaslight me through "experts" who knew their jobs, but every-time, it didn't last more than 5 minutes before a big blunder from them. My boss was afraid to cancel the project, because it was a huge company intertwined with the state. Naturally, I read the contract and in the bottom of one of the first page, I read "Any amount paid is due". I read that sentence an hundred times, because I couldn't believe I had a proper understanding of that. So, anything we perceived was ours. And that was a contract they did redact. So, I went to the boss and showed him that sentence he we were both in the same boat "is it really that written here ?". He cancelled the project and could keep the payments 😂
The company just went with another provider and had a website "available soon", until they just abandoned and use their old site.
Now, they still had most of the analysis done by us, so it was not a total loss. They also learned what are personas, system expert, business interviews...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Due to how our species is shaped, women are more important than men. The goal of a species is to reproduce or at least survive. Happens that one man can impregnate many women, but women can only give birth every 9 months. So, biologically, you need to protect women as they are more valuable for perpetuity.
This is why it is so ingrained in our culture and even psyche.
What is really bad, is that women will NOT acknowledge that status and all the benefits they get from it. (e.g. Kids and women first, not forcefully enrolled --draft--, graced of all dirty jobs, acceptable to be maintained by a man, get custody and child support by default, lower penal judgement for same crime, less likely to be homeless and more support in that regard, higher lifespan...).
The most laughable thing is women contrasting their monthly period and having to carry life with men doing very dangerous, strenuous daily jobs.
It's why women will be prompt to reply along the lines "but outside work".
On top of that, society is heavily skewed to favor women. Dare to hit one and you will understand! Also, say to say, women have the high end.
If you include house work for both gender and professional work, men are at default. (Pay over Effective Work Hours)
Men work about one and half (50 to 60 hour week + housework) as much as full time working women (30 to 40 hour week + housework).
Things is that the figures given are for full time men VS mostly part time women raw.
Yet, it's kind of accepted and society is working at large to have equal pay regardless of hours.
Those are all things women "forget".
Another funny one is about IQ. Women have on average a bigger IQ. But women do also show a lesser standard deviation. That means that women, on average, are closer to their mean. Men have on average a lower IQ. But men do also show a greater standard deviation. That means that men, on average, are further away from their mean. That means that if you get away from the mean (dumber or smarter), there is more men represented, up to seldom finding any women. Hence, more men in prisons and more men doing great things. So, equal representation is not at all equality there! Yet, it's also accepted. (Admittedly, that one is way harder to spot for the layman)
Also, you may think that it's advantageous to pick women for brainy work as on average they are smarter. But what you overlook is that if you take into account only the top performers, then men have a huge edge due to respective distribution. That's the skew we see in practice.
The only case where it works, it's when you are presented a random group of people to chose from. Then you should pick women first.
(Doesn't work for people showing for interview as it's not a finite group and people pres-elect themselves. That work if people are randomly selected, then you need to pick from that selection. Really depends on where you are looking at the bell curve.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Code in a stupid way, and your program will survive longer ^^
In implementing form validation, I coded the whole thing, assuming I would have two magic functions. One is to retrieve a field from whatever structure was passed to it, and the other is to retrieve a value from whatever design was passed to it. So, relatively easy to do the validation using those functions.
Then I created those two first-order functions to grab fields/values from the right place.
When the same functionality was required in an Angular application, only those two functions were to be remade. I tried explaining that to the other developer, who insisted on changing the "core." I don't do Angular (I did AngularJS), but in the end, I did those two functions myself. The guy still didn't wrap his head around it.
Later, we had to update the core, copying one JS file. He had the same issue; he didn't understand it was just a copy-paste...Took a few times before he became confident. I even asked my boss if I could take over that part entirely because going into a call to copy a file is...painful.
In another application, I created an intermediate representation. My boss thought it was a waste of resources, but that intermediate format is more suited for processing. A small upfront cost for a lot of downward efficiency! I had to implement a new feature, and thanks to the intermediate format, it took a day instead of a week ^^
And I am the first to say comments are usually band smell (as a QAM, I used comments as a mean to quickly find code that belongs to a function), but most of them read like "do not attempt to simplify" or "bug in library, force reloading data".
Now there is a considerable drawback, people not used to that way of programming are stumped because it's not a big block of code where you can read from top to bottom. In the middle of the code, you have a call to a function coming from the parameters, so you've to see how it's called to see the body of that function in context...except that you don't have to because you're supposed to work at a different level of abstraction. So, it makes stuff way simpler as you just have to assume the function does what it says it does.
And that's the beauty; in the end, you concentrate on a very generic algorithm, which is relatively easy. Then you fill in the gap, which is relatively easy too. Then you end up with something complex but totally digestible if you don't freak out. On top of that, the JVM loves smaller methods. (No JIT if bigger than 8k, and I saw strategies much bigger than that ^^)
I have 15 years of professional development, 25 years with hobby. (You can look up "Navigateur à onglets gérant ses favoris et qui peut se dupliquer (==>capture)" for an example)
1
-
@quadrannilator Ordinals are tied to cardinal. You're the second, because when doing an ordered counting, you say "two".
So, ordinal comes first. But it's not directly the counting we are used to. It's parallel counting. So the kid do a mapping between objects and numbers. That means that finding the n-th element is challenging and counting above 5 is a struggle.
Not that even toddlers have an understanding of 1 to 3. (and bird too ^^)
After 3, it's "a lot".
So, counting is ordering the collection then remembering the last ordinal used.
Also, if you ask the kid to start at another place and if it would get the same count, he will do the counting again! They do not grasp that the order is irrelevant.
We we grow up, we can count big collections easily, because we abandon parallel counting for matching known configuration to known cardinals and using basic arithmetic. As an example, if you are asked to count sugar cubes in a nxn grid, you'll estimate number of row and column and proceed to multiply.
As for patterns, because you're used to the classic 6 faces die, you don't count the dot at all. You recognize the figure. Same if we show you regular polygons.
Now, we have a sens of number that is logarithmic. While most adults easily recognize sets with less than 10 elements, it breaks down when shown more than 50 elements. That's because we are already at a scale closer to hundreds. So the units lose importance.
To understand that, imagine there is a lion. A lion is quite dangerous, but much less than two of them. If there was 100 lions and one more joined the party, that wouldn't make much of a difference. So, the same amount of lion (one) is seen differently depending on the scale.
Another example of that bias is that if something cost 70$ and you get it for 35$, it's quite a good deal. You may even spend an hour of your time to get that deal.
If something did cost 700$ and you could get it for 665$, chances that this not that much worth that you spend and hour for such a small gain. Yet, it's the same 35$ gain.
And there is a transition where kids will regress in their ability to count. First they do parallel counting, then move to pattern recognition, but lack the operational skills. So, as soon the scale is changing they spit random answers! If they did fall back to parallel counting, they would yield the right answer! But parallel counting is very demanding and we are lazy creatures.
Maths is possible, because we don't treat numbers as ordinal or cardinal. We handle them as pure symbols, with rules to move them around.
When you do 1234+5678, you don't need to visualize "8" in your head. You know 8 and 4 yield 12. Which means that unit is 2 and have to add 1 on the next position. You just follow the rules and you obtain 6912. And depending on the necessity, you may not even have to think on the meaning of 6912.
The calculation 1+2, may be the formalisation: "I have one apple and receive two more apples. How many apples do I have ?""
But it can also be: "I was the first, then two people came in front of me. At which position am I ?".
To solve 1+2, you don't do ⨷+⨷⨷=⨷⨷⨷. You did +(1,2)->3.
Then you translated back as "3 apples" or "the third".
1
-
1
-
J'ai eu le temps de lire quelques études depuis. Le facteur chance n'existe pas. Je pensais que c'était un peu le cas, mais pas du tout!
Et ça explique très bien ma situation. J'ai été élevé par l'état. On avait le strict minimum pour vivre et loin d'avoir des conditions idéales pour apprende.
Que ce soit dans les écoles où je suis passé ou dans le village, nous étions vus comme des délinquants "ces gens des institutions qui cassent tout et n'on aucun respect".
Et on ne va pas se mentir, je n'étais pas placé car j'avais une famille idéeal 😅
Tous les enfant placés avaient des troubles grâves.
Même dans cette situation, j'ai fais des tonnes de bénévolat et j'ai appris en allant à la bibliothèque lorsque j'ai eu la permission de quiter le village.
Je me suis inscrit à 《Osons la science》et très vite, je suis devenu bénévole assistant.
Bref, j'ai fais quelques petites choses.
Résultat: multiples prix, dont celui de la meilleur évolution dans la vie, celui d'avoir vulgarisé la crypto quantique, champion .net national.
Et j'ai payé mon appart, j'ai un travail 100% remote et aménagé.
Une bonne situation en somme. Et là, je reviens même d'un voyage en Espagne, tout frais payés par la société.
La seule chance que j'ai eue est biologique. Un cerveau qui fonctionne mieux que la moyenne combiné à de l'altruisme (l'envie de donner aux autres et aider car ça fait du bien).
Ah, j'ai oublié, côté malchance on a l'autisme. Ce qui fait que socialement, je galère de temps en temps.
Et pourtant... 😀
1
-
1
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5usMais le "truc", c'est que la majorité des Français ne sont pas nés au congo handicapés à 150km d'une bibliothèque!
La majorité des français (certainement un chiffre comme 99%) ont eu une situation bien meilleure que la mienne.
Le seul avantage que j'ai, c'est mon percentile 99. Et il a été prouvé que le QI n'a que peu d'importance (ça j'y crois pas, mais c'est l'argumemt classique, donc je l'accepte ici).
Donc comment est-ce possible que j'aie fais mieux que le français moyen?
Bah oui, j'ai en effet mérité ma situation actuelle 😅
Il y a toujours pire et on peut facilement se réconforter en se disant qu'au fond, on est las responsable de ce qu'on devienr car le facteur chance est énorme. Puis sortir l'exemple de l'Africain handicapé sans aucune resources.
Et pourtant, des gens dans l'extrême, comme moi, s'en sortent.
Et on est problématiques. Car on a effectivement aucune aide supplémentaire et pourtant on acquière une situation meilleure que le français moyen. Ce qui va à l'encontre du discours.
Comment est-ce qu'un enfant pauvre et maltraité peut finir avec un bon travail et son propre appartement? La chance? Quelle chance? Celle d'avoir eu moins que 99% des français?
Puis lorsqu'om regarde, on voit que la personne a passé son temps à s'instruire (accessible à tous), à faire du bénévolat (accessible à tous).
Donc forcément, une personne qui a passé plusieurs fois 10000h dans différentes compétences va s'en sortir mieux que le reste.
Quand j'ai entreprit les études pour être Analyste-Développeur en sysyèmes industriels (la filliaire la plus difficile en informatique), c'était facile pour moi! J'avais déjà lu 300 livres sur le sujet. Je savais déjà ce qu'était une architecture de von Neumann. J'aidais même ceux de 3èmes sur leurs projets, je faisais partie du conseil étudiant (encore du bénévolat).
Donc oui, quand je suis rentré dans le monde du travail, j'avais un CV long comme le bras et top candidate dans les tests techniques. Seul l'autisme était un frein pour les ITV. Et pourtant, j'ai trouvé un travail 100% remote où je travail isolément et je n'ainde contact que pour les ITV très protocolaires (définition des besoins, présentation de solutions) et avec une équipe sales et de suppor énorme. (donc je n'ai pas a perdre du temps sur des questions comme "à quoi sert ce bouton" ou "est-ce que la solution peut aussi faire X").
Est-ce que le bureau des privilèges m'a appellé? Non.
Pour me premier travail, oui, on m'a apellé. L'école m'avair shortlisté.
Pour ce travail-ci, c'est un collègue devenu CEO qui m'a apellé car il savait que je suis un excellent AD.
Il a rassemblé et gères les autres personnes, et je m'occupe de ce qui n'est pas support, sales ou infra.
Et la raison de tout ça? Quand les gens se branlaient, j'étais dans des livres.
C'est la seul différence.
Alors tu peux me dire que me faire maltraiter et punir pendant 18 ans a été une chance. Mais sache que c'est totalement à l'encontre de ton point. Car ça voudrait dire que ton African handicapé devrait être millionaire.
Maintenant, oui, le QI, malgré tout ce que la gauche peut dire, est LE facteur. Si ton Africain handicapé avait aussi un percentile 99, il aurait fondé une société Africaine er serait riche. De vraies études montrent qu'en effet, le QI prévaut sur toutes les autres conditions.
Et qu'on peut dire que j'ai eu cette chance. Un bon QI m'a permis de réaliser que tout casser et faire le caïd ne m'apporterait rien. D'être mature à 6 ans et pas 21. Et donc de prendre des décisions d'adulte.
Mais voici un twist, la société française est faite pour un percentile 50. Il n'y a donc aucune excuse de faire moins bien que son voisin.
En ce qui concerne le mérite, n'est-il pas normal que celui qui contribue plus soit récompensé? Même si l'effort peut lui sembler moindre?
1h de mon temps est certainement l'équivalent de plusieurs journées du tien, n'est il donc pas raisonable qu'on aie au moin 50% de son propre labeur avant de partager le reste?
Ce qui signifie que je permet à une centaines de personnes de profiter de mes resources, tandis que je reçois quasi rien en retour?
C'est le système actuel. T'es probablement taxé à 14%, je le suis à 40%.
C'est la magie de notre "mérotocratie", ceux qui produisent le plus de valeur recoivent le moins, proportionellement.
Oui, je touche plus d'argent que toi. Moins du double, mais je verse plus du double. 😅
Donc dans les fait "par ce que tu n'as pas de chance", l'état corrige ça en te donnant plus proportionellement.
On bien que je paie bien plus (40% de presque 2 fois plus et beaucoup plus grand que 12% de 2 fois moins: 7×) nous profitons exactement des mêmes services. Et si tu es malade ou handicapé, tu paies encore moins et bénéficie d'encore plus de services!
Alors oui, là on est tout a fait d'accord, ce n'est pas du tout une méritocratie!
Est-ce qu'il faudrait alors abandonner ce système ?
Tout le monde, quelque soit sa condition, recevrais le même salaire. Et chacun en fait ce qu'il veut. Si t'es PMR, pas d'bol. Si t'as pas besoin de beaucoup, youpie! 😂
Je t'en prie, donne nous une meilleir solution que 《On prend encore plus aux personnes qui produisent le plus》.
En sachant que le jour où ça devient exagéré, je passe en mode croisière 😂
1
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5us Ah, mais j'ai tapé juste! 😂
Je ne dévalue aucunement les autres. La vérité dérange, c'est tout.
Je suis né avec une certaine capacité, d'autres sont nés avec d'autres capacités. On est dans une société qui est faite pour une personne moyenne, avec des occuoations adaptées aux personnes moyennes.
C'est toi qui dévalorise tout le monde en disant qu'être moyen, c'est être plus malchanceux que ceux qui sont nés misérables et ont vécu misérables 😅
Depuis le début, tu fais tout pour retirer l'agence des gens. Tu n'arrêtes pas de dire que tout est lié à la chance.
Et je reconnais très bien ce discours de crétin qui finit toujours sous la forme 《On prend la partie de la population la plus productive et on la met en esclavage pour le bien du plus grand nombre》.
Donc oui, il vaut mieux que tu t'abstienne d'expliquer ce qui te semblerait un bon modèle, car tu passera pour un crétin, d'autant que je viens d'écrire ce qui serait ta conclusion après quelques heures d'échanges.
Et c'est ça qui t'énerve. T'es coincé, t'es fait 😂
1
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5us Et devine quoi? Ils ont réussis car ils ont choisi une voie qui leur permettra d'apporter le plus à la société!
Ils auraient pu choisir d'être un mauvais mathématicien ou nageur.
La société moderne est adapté à l'homme moyen. Si t'es moyen, la société actuelle te donne tout pour réussi.
Mieux, moins t'es bon, plus elle te donne et plus t'es bon, plus elle te prend.
Prenons l'exemple de la taxe, c'est très bien défini. Si tu touches 11293€, tu paies 0€ à l'état. Si tu touches 28786€, tu paies 1400€.
Et ça, ce ne sont que les taxes et il est évident que celui qui touche 28786 apporte plus à la société que celui qui touche 11293. Pourquoi? Car le reste de la société est prêt a payer ses services plus chers. La raison: la rareté. Son service est soit unique, soit de plus grande qualité.
Et pourtant, il paira infiniment plus! Drôle non?
Alors oui, il y a le pourcent d'exception de gens qui ont reçu une grosse fortune et ne font rien aussi. Mais ils ne paient pas 0, ils paient des millions d'euro. Et pour les mêmes services!
Et encore, si tu paies 0€ à l'état, tu reçois en général des sous de l'état sans travailler et des services gratuits!
N'est-ce pas un système inégalitaire où ceux qui produisent le plus, même par chance, sont les plus taxés?
Disons que nous abolissons le mérite complètement. Après-tout, voilà, tu as de la chance d'être né en France, tu ne maîtrise pas ta vie car elle se fait aux aléa des rencontres et opportunités (on admet que tu ne peux pas créer des opportunités, que toute pensé de régler un problème que tout le monde a est interdite et ainsi que toute forme d'apprentissage, que tu ne peux pas faire d'efforts pour changer ton attitude et tes aptitudes et que t'es d'office bien en dessous de la moyenne quelque soit le critère qu'on inventerait). Comme le mérite n'existe plus, tu es assigné un travail et l'état te fournit un logement et a manger. Si tu veux aller au cinéma, aux parcs d'attraction etc. T'a qu'a poser un de tes 180 congés ou y aller après ta journée de 4h (on admet que tout le monde travail et qu'il y a des robots qui diminuent fortement le travail nécessaire, donc 180 jours de 4h par ans sont amplement suffisant.
Tu vas à ton travail, tu vois Jo qui bosse 10 minutes, prend une pause de 3h40, revient pour terminer son travail pendant les 10 dernières minutes. Et toi, ça fait 3h que tu bosses comme un dingue et ton résultat est plutot moyen. Tu vas pas te dire un seul instant que c'est injuste que l'autre se prend 3h de pause par jour peut-être ?
Ça peut te sembler surréaliste, mais je l'ai vécu dams quasi toutes les équipes où j'ai bossé: 《Mais Christian, pourquoj tunne fais pas cette partie là de mon travail, ça va me mettre des heures et tu vas le faire en 5 minutes》.
Et la réponse que tu n'aimes pas (et eux aussi): 《Car je fais un travail que tu ne sais pas faire oubil te faudrait des années. Désolé, mais je ne peux pas faire 5 minutes du travail de chacun, sinon je ne fais las mon travail et personne d'autre ne peut le faire (aussi vite).》
Par exemple, avec mon patron, nous avons convenu que ma journée de travail, ce n'est pas ce que je fais, mais ma disponibilité. Que je fasse le travail en 1h ou plus de 8h, il s'en fout. Je lui dis, il voit si il me donne autre chose, ou si il ne me donne rien pour avoir le temps de faire circuler le résultat au support, marketing et client pour réception. Aussi pour tester si c'est la bonne solution.
Donc il y a des journées où je fais 8h hard core et d'autre où c'est 1h ou 2h. Et je ne fais que 4 jours sur 5, car ça fait partie des adaptations que j'ai demandées. Il peut me virer et trouver un autre si il veut. On est tout les deux libres.
Et là, on est sur un système juste. Il sait qu'il y est gagnant, puisqu'il ne paie qu'un salaire. Je touche un très bon salaire pour ce que je fais. Si je partais, il devrait payer plusieur fois ce salaire (environ 5 à 8 personnes "senior" pour couvrir l'ensemble des projets et effectuer la coordination, les analyses).
C'est pour ça que je sais que tu ne peux pas décrir un système fonctionnel autre que la méritocratie. Car même le système actuel de redistribution (hé oui, la plupart des pays d'Europe, dont la france, sont des systèmes redistributifs, très loins de la mériticratie!) est loin d'être parfait.
Et le système parfait existe: c'est celui où chaque personne peut voter qui est le plus récompensé en fonction de la valeur perçue du service pour la société. Par exemple, si la majorité préfère le pain, alors elle va voter pour que les boulangers aient plus de ressources. Si les gens préfèrent plus la musique, ils viteront plus pour les musiciens. Ça garantie une optimisation des services, sans devoir tout centraliser.
C'est un système simple et en autogestion aidé par une régulation interne. Si quelqu'um essaie d'arnaquer les autres en disant qu'il ne fera pas de pain tant qu'il n'a pas assez de votes, un autre peut facilement prendre sa place en acceptant moins de votes (et donc moins de ressources). Les personnes peuvent utiliser les voies reçues pour voter à leur tour. Ça garantie une redistribution constante des voix et des ressources.
Est-ce que tu penses que c'est mieux que ce qu'on a?
1
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5us C'est pour ça qu'il faut faire l'effort de trouver sa voie.
J'ai eux plusieurs choix dans ma vie. Est-ce que j'utilise mon intelligence pour arnaquer mon entourage ou est-ce que je vais à la bibliothèque.
Est-ce que je reste jouer dehors ou je vais faire du bénévolat ? (préparer les activités, puis les annimer)
Est-ce que je continue en Biotechnique (voie choisie par l'école selon mes "prédispositions") ou est-ce que je vais malgré tout en transition technique pour faire de l'electro mécanique?
Est-ce que je participe aux salons "Exp'osons" ou je vais casser des trucs.
Est-ce que j'essaie d'avoir les meilleurs notes ou est-ce que j'en profite pour me la couler douce?
Fais-je une licence en mathématiques ou Analyste-Développeur en systèmes industriels?
Est-ce que je loue mon appartement ou est-ce que je l'achète?
Après, il est possible que tu aies eu des parents qui t'on controllé. L'avantage de ne pas avoir de parents actif dans sa vie (je voyais mon père toutes les 2 semaines pour 1 weekend), c'est qu'ils ne peuvent pas contrôler ta vie. Et l'État, son seul soucis, c'est que tu ne meurs pas le temps que tu sois à sa charge😅
Donc bref, j'ai effectué des choix important avec les conséqueneces qui vont avec.
Lorsque je vulgarisait la cryptographie quantique, j'étais plongé dans des livres et occupé a faire mes panneau et mettre au point une expérience a présenter. Pendant ce temps là, les autres jouaient dehors. Quand j'étais bénévole pour le mouvement de jeunesse, je devais prendre du temps pour créer les activités. Idem pour osons la science.
En échange, j'ai fais face a des problèmes de gestion humainss que j'ai rencontré plus tard dans le monde professionel. J'ai aussi pris le plis de réaoudre des problèmes de façon pragmatique.
Est-ce que c'était le fruit du hasard? Non, je savais que jouer dehors ou casser des trucs était moins profitable qu'apprendre et s'exercer. Je voulais être prof et le bénévolat m'a permis de m'exercer a gérer des groupea d'enfants. Aussi bien dans les bois que dans un local où ils sont tous assis sagement.
C'était des choix réfléchis.
Réusltat: ça a porté ses fruits!
Si j'avais fais d'autres choix, je serais comme 12 des autres enfants: passé dans un centre fermé, puis quelques années en prison pour finir avec un métier qui ne requiert pas de diplômes.
Et oui, certains individus bénéficient d'une chance ou malchanve inouïe qui fera 95% de leur vie, maisnon parle de moins d'1% de la population.
Si tu regardes les surdoués (donc 98+ percentiles), ils n'ont pas tous ma situation. Est-ce par ce que j'ai eu plus de chance? en général ils sont de bonne famille, bien aisés, dans un milieux super favorisant...Et ils font de la merde.
Si tu regardes le double mauvais sort d'Horowitz, tu verras que ma situation est "normale". Avec la direté des épreuves, j'ai dû devenir matur très tôt et un dévelopement précoce aide beaucoup. De ce fait, même un milieu défavorisant n'était pas suffisant pour m'empêcher de devenir ce que je suis.
La personne moyenne est vraiement superbement équipée pour faire ce qu'elle veut. Elle est super chanceuse d'être moyenne, car tout est fait pour elle. Et pourtant, même avec cette chance extraordinaire, riend d'extraordinaire en ressort.
Pourquoi? Car la personne moyenne se rassure de ne rien faire d'extraordinaire car elle est juste slectatrice de sa vie. Après tout, quelle est l'importance du choix quand celui-ci est effacé par le facteur chance. Quelle est l'importance du choix quand tout au plus, il est responsable de 5% de la situation.
Pour mériter, il ne sagit pas de s'entêter dans une voie sans issue, mais bien de trouver une voie qui permet le plus de contribution dans la société dans laquelle on vie.
Mais quelque soit le forme de société que tu pourrais envisager, elle ne pourra fonctionner que sur le dos de géants: ceux qui actuellement produisent le plus. Et j'ai déjà expliqué en quoi celà est plus que problématique.
1
-
@JeanFoutre-yi5us@JeanFoutre-yi5us Bien sûr que ça l'est. Ce n'est par ce qu'il n'y a pas d'équipement modernes, de médecine et qu'on crève de faim qu'on sait mieux s'en sortir que la personne moyenne qui ne fait rien car elle pense comme toi.
Sinon, on prend la population moyenne du Vatican ou de Monaco et on se laisse mourrir, voir se suicide puisque de toute façons, nous ne sommes que spectateurs.
Et oui, tu refuses d'expliquer ce qui remplacerait les systèmes actuels et refuse de discuter de la méritocratie (le sujet) de façon plus profonde que "ça n'existe pas, car nous sommes ce que la chance a fait de nous".
Et la grande différence entre nous deux, c'est que je vis bien car je suis acteur de ma vie. Donc j'ai pu en effet jouer contre la chance.
Par contre, tu auras une vie de merde bien méritée à défaut d'une chance extraordinaire. Garantie 100%
Jusqu'au jour où tu comprendra que nous faisons partie d'un système dynamique complexe et que tu tiendra compte des autres.
Car tu t'es fais un monde où la personne moyenne n'existe pas et où les gens aux capacitées plus décevelopéées reçoivent le plus. Or dans le monde réel, ces personnes donne de infiiment plus à 50% de leur effort, pendant que les autres donnent 10% à 20%.
Je pense que ton cerveau a été pourri par une sorte de nihilisme. Une très bonne philosophie, mais dangereuse pour les imbéciles. J'en suis désolé pour toi.
Je termine donc avec: intéresse toi aux différents systèmes et aux raisons pour lesquels on demande à ceux qui produisent le plus dans la société à donner beaucoup plus aussi. Et pourquoi un revenu universel n'est pas appliqué alors qu'on pourrait techniquement le faire.
Et de conclure, pour tout lecteur, que la méritocratie peut fonctionner si les personnes sont acteurs de leur vie et que nous devrions offrir le suicide assisté à ceux qui m'en sont que passager. Nous sommes déjà trop nombreux et 20% de lanpopulation travail pour les 80% restants. Il faut trouver une solution pour rétablir cet équilibre et permettre aux gens, en souffrance permanente de n'être que le fruit des aléa de la chance, de partir doucement. La planète a vraiment besoin de ça en plus, donc ce serait économique. Un peu eugénique aussi, mais bon, personne nen serait forcé.
- FIN
1
-
@mescouettes La France est l'un de ces pays de redistribution. L'impôt progressif étant un marqueur assez fort.
Donc de base, la france n'est las une méritocratie. Elle se rapproche de l'univers 25. Si tu ne fais rien, en France tu reçois des aides.
On pourrait dire que la France, da l'étag est une "anti-méritocratie".ns Dans le sens que plus tu apporte à la société, moins tu reçois de ce que tu produit.
En effet, tu commence par perdre ton droit au logement gratuit, puis au logement las cher et l'état te demande un pourcentage de plus en plus élevé de ce que tu produis.
Dans une méritocratie, c'est l'opposé qui se passe. Plus tu fournit, plus la société te donne.
Donc lea politiques sont un peu cons pour le coup. Et ils peuvent se le permettre, car le discours basé sur la chance est leur arme la plus forte. Ce discours permet d'enlever l'agence des personnes les plus faibles "Oui, certains font mieux que toi en partant d'une situation biem pire, mais c'est une question de chance. Si il avait été un enfant du Sahel handicapé, tu crois qu'il airait accompli les mêmes choses?".
C'est une arme redoutable, car les personnes ayant vécu dans un foyer avec lss deux parents, dans un milieu favorisant et avec une intelligence moyenne vont promptement se dire:"ouf, ma situation n'est pas de ma faut, c'est bien la chance. Ceux-là ne doivent même pas travailler car ils ont hérité de la fortune de papa".
Et pour une personne comme moi, il y a des milliers de français à la condition bien supérieure (statistiquement, c'est très dificile d'être dans ma situation initiale, c'est pour cela que j'ai reçu un prix du Rotary Club pour "meilleur évolution dans la vie", les autres dossiers étaient visiblement moins impressionant) et qui finiront dans le cannivau!
Alors où est le problème?
Tout simplement qu'à mes 6 ans, je devais déjà penser comme un adulte. Qu'à mes 8 ans, je travaillais (ménage, vailselle, cuisine pour 17 quand c'était mom tour). Je me faisais tabasser et devait me défendre. Les gens me traitaient par défaut comme un délinquant.
Du coup, quand tu arrives dans le monde pro, t'es sur armé. La résilience c'est ta base.
D'un autre côté, le français moyen est chez papa maman qui lui achète même une voiture et de quoi s'installer dans un appart, aide avec les loyers, voire paie l'appart. Et pourtant, ces gens sont bien plus misérables que moi. (aussi facile a vérifier, car j'occupe un poste difficile d'accès)
Et qu'elle en est la raison? Le français moyen est désarmé car il n'a que très peux de difficultés a surmonter!
Donc en quelque sorte, ce facteur chance ne fonctionne pas tout a fait comme vous le pensez!
Et la société couve de plusnen plus les gens car c'est le meilleur moyen de contrôle. Que peux-tu faire si t'es las d'accord avec la société qui te loge, te nourrit et te divertit?
Aussi, nous voyons de plus en plus de personnes à la rue, car actuellement, moins de 25% de la société font vivre les 75%. Ce n'est pas tenable et le résultat est un sustème qui ne sait plus traiter les démunis correctement. Sans oublier le gaspillage burreaucratique (il faut plus de gens pour gérer et c'est plus de gens qui confondent leurs poches).
Bref, si la France continue l'anti-mérotocratie, elle se vénézuelarisera, puis tombera.
D'autant que plus la redistribution est forte, plus les personnes revoient leurs priorités. Dès qu'un salaire universel garantit tombe, je cesse de travailler pour m'occuper de recherches personelles à plein temps, faire du bénévolat et programmer quelques jeux.
1
-
@mescouettesLa France est l'un de ces pays de redistribution. L'impôt progressif étant un marqueur assez fort.
Donc de base, la france n'est las une méritocratie. Elle se rapproche de l'univers 25. Si tu ne fais rien, en France tu reçois des aides.
On pourrait dire que la France, da l'étag est une "anti-méritocratie".ns Dans le sens que plus tu apporte à la société, moins tu reçois de ce que tu produit.
En effet, tu commence par perdre ton droit au logement gratuit, puis au logement las cher et l'état te demande un pourcentage de plus en plus élevé de ce que tu produis.
Dans une méritocratie, c'est l'opposé qui se passe. Plus tu fournit, plus la société te donne.
Donc lea politiques sont un peu cons pour le coup. Et ils peuvent se le permettre, car le discours basé sur la chance est leur arme la plus forte. Ce discours permet d'enlever l'agence des personnes les plus faibles "Oui, certains font mieux que toi en partant d'une situation biem pire, mais c'est une question de chance. Si il avait été un enfant du Sahel handicapé, tu crois qu'il airait accompli les mêmes choses?".
C'est une arme redoutable, car les personnes ayant vécu dans un foyer avec lss deux parents, dans un milieu favorisant et avec une intelligence moyenne vont promptement se dire:"ouf, ma situation n'est pas de ma faut, c'est bien la chance. Ceux-là ne doivent même pas travailler car ils ont hérité de la fortune de papa".
Et pour une personne comme moi, il y a des milliers de français à la condition bien supérieure (statistiquement, c'est très dificile d'être dans ma situation initiale, c'est pour cela que j'ai reçu un prix du Rotary Club pour "meilleur évolution dans la vie", les autres dossiers étaient visiblement moins impressionant) et qui finiront dans le cannivau!
Alors où est le problème?
Tout simplement qu'à mes 6 ans, je devais déjà penser comme un adulte. Qu'à mes 8 ans, je travaillais (ménage, vailselle, cuisine pour 17 quand c'était mom tour). Je me faisais tabasser et devait me défendre. Les gens me traitaient par défaut comme un délinquant.
Du coup, quand tu arrives dans le monde pro, t'es sur armé. La résilience c'est ta base.
D'un autre côté, le français moyen est chez papa maman qui lui achète même une voiture et de quoi s'installer dans un appart, aide avec les loyers, voire paie l'appart. Et pourtant, ces gens sont bien plus misérables que moi. (aussi facile a vérifier, car j'occupe un poste difficile d'accès)
Et qu'elle en est la raison? Le français moyen est désarmé car il n'a que très peux de difficultés a surmonter!
Donc en quelque sorte, ce facteur chance ne fonctionne pas tout a fait comme vous le pensez!
Et la société couve de plusnen plus les gens car c'est le meilleur moyen de contrôle. Que peux-tu faire si t'es las d'accord avec la société qui te loge, te nourrit et te divertit?
Aussi, nous voyons de plus en plus de personnes à la rue, car actuellement, moins de 25% de la société font vivre les 75%. Ce n'est pas tenable et le résultat est un sustème qui ne sait plus traiter les démunis correctement. Sans oublier le gaspillage burreaucratique (il faut plus de gens pour gérer et c'est plus de gens qui confondent leurs poches).
Bref, si la France continue l'anti-mérotocratie, elle se vénézuelarisera, puis tombera.
D'autant que plus la redistribution est forte, plus les personnes revoient leurs priorités. Dès qu'un salaire universel garantit tombe, je cesse de travailler pour m'occuper de recherches personelles à plein temps, faire du bénévolat et programmer quelques jeux.
1
-
@mescouettes (repost du 23) La France est l'un de ces pays de redistribution. L'impôt progressif étant un marqueur assez fort.
Donc de base, la france n'est las une méritocratie. Elle se rapproche de l'univers 25. Si tu ne fais rien, en France tu reçois des aides.
On pourrait dire que la France, da l'étag est une "anti-méritocratie".ns Dans le sens que plus tu apporte à la société, moins tu reçois de ce que tu produit.
En effet, tu commence par perdre ton droit au logement gratuit, puis au logement las cher et l'état te demande un pourcentage de plus en plus élevé de ce que tu produis.
Dans une méritocratie, c'est l'opposé qui se passe. Plus tu fournit, plus la société te donne.
Donc lea politiques sont un peu cons pour le coup. Et ils peuvent se le permettre, car le discours basé sur la chance est leur arme la plus forte. Ce discours permet d'enlever l'agence des personnes les plus faibles "Oui, certains font mieux que toi en partant d'une situation biem pire, mais c'est une question de chance. Si il avait été un enfant du Sahel handicapé, tu crois qu'il airait accompli les mêmes choses?".
C'est une arme redoutable, car les personnes ayant vécu dans un foyer avec lss deux parents, dans un milieu favorisant et avec une intelligence moyenne vont promptement se dire:"ouf, ma situation n'est pas de ma faut, c'est bien la chance. Ceux-là ne doivent même pas travailler car ils ont hérité de la fortune de papa".
Et pour une personne comme moi, il y a des milliers de français à la condition bien supérieure (statistiquement, c'est très dificile d'être dans ma situation initiale, c'est pour cela que j'ai reçu un prix du Rotary Club pour "meilleur évolution dans la vie", les autres dossiers étaient visiblement moins impressionant) et qui finiront dans le cannivau!
Alors où est le problème?
Tout simplement qu'à mes 6 ans, je devais déjà penser comme un adulte. Qu'à mes 8 ans, je travaillais (ménage, vailselle, cuisine pour 17 quand c'était mom tour). Je me faisais tabasser et devait me défendre. Les gens me traitaient par défaut comme un délinquant.
Du coup, quand tu arrives dans le monde pro, t'es sur armé. La résilience c'est ta base.
D'un autre côté, le français moyen est chez papa maman qui lui achète même une voiture et de quoi s'installer dans un appart, aide avec les loyers, voire paie l'appart. Et pourtant, ces gens sont bien plus misérables que moi. (aussi facile a vérifier, car j'occupe un poste difficile d'accès)
Et qu'elle en est la raison? Le français moyen est désarmé car il n'a que très peux de difficultés a surmonter!
Donc en quelque sorte, ce facteur chance ne fonctionne pas tout a fait comme vous le pensez!
Et la société couve de plusnen plus les gens car c'est le meilleur moyen de contrôle. Que peux-tu faire si t'es las d'accord avec la société qui te loge, te nourrit et te divertit?
Aussi, nous voyons de plus en plus de personnes à la rue, car actuellement, moins de 25% de la société font vivre les 75%. Ce n'est pas tenable et le résultat est un sustème qui ne sait plus traiter les démunis correctement. Sans oublier le gaspillage burreaucratique (il faut plus de gens pour gérer et c'est plus de gens qui confondent leurs poches).
Bref, si la France continue l'anti-mérotocratie, elle se vénézuelarisera, puis tombera.
D'autant que plus la redistribution est forte, plus les personnes revoient leurs priorités. Dès qu'un salaire universel garantit tombe, je cesse de travailler pour m'occuper de recherches personelles à plein temps, faire du bénévolat et programmer quelques jeux.
1
-
1
-
@mescouettes @mescouettes La France est l'un de ces pays de redistribution. L'impôt progressif étant un marqueur assez fort.
Donc de base, la france n'est las une méritocratie. Elle se rapproche de l'univers 25. Si tu ne fais rien, en France tu reçois des aides.
On pourrait dire que la France, da l'étag est une "anti-méritocratie".ns Dans le sens que plus tu apporte à la société, moins tu reçois de ce que tu produit.
En effet, tu commence par perdre ton droit au logement gratuit, puis au logement las cher et l'état te demande un pourcentage de plus en plus élevé de ce que tu produis.
Dans une méritocratie, c'est l'opposé qui se passe. Plus tu fournit, plus la société te donne.
Donc lea politiques sont un peu cons pour le coup. Et ils peuvent se le permettre, car le discours basé sur la chance est leur arme la plus forte. Ce discours permet d'enlever l'agence des personnes les plus faibles "Oui, certains font mieux que toi en partant d'une situation biem pire, mais c'est une question de chance. Si il avait été un enfant du Sahel handicapé, tu crois qu'il airait accompli les mêmes choses?".
C'est une arme redoutable, car les personnes ayant vécu dans un foyer avec lss deux parents, dans un milieu favorisant et avec une intelligence moyenne vont promptement se dire:"ouf, ma situation n'est pas de ma faut, c'est bien la chance. Ceux-là ne doivent même pas travailler car ils ont hérité de la fortune de papa".
Et pour une personne comme moi, il y a des milliers de français à la condition bien supérieure (statistiquement, c'est très dificile d'être dans ma situation initiale, c'est pour cela que j'ai reçu un prix du Rotary Club pour "meilleur évolution dans la vie", les autres dossiers étaient visiblement moins impressionant) et qui finiront dans le cannivau!
Alors où est le problème?
Tout simplement qu'à mes 6 ans, je devais déjà penser comme un adulte. Qu'à mes 8 ans, je travaillais (ménage, vailselle, cuisine pour 17 quand c'était mom tour). Je me faisais tabasser et devait me défendre. Les gens me traitaient par défaut comme un délinquant.
Du coup, quand tu arrives dans le monde pro, t'es sur armé. La résilience c'est ta base.
D'un autre côté, le français moyen est chez papa maman qui lui achète même une voiture et de quoi s'installer dans un appart, aide avec les loyers, voire paie l'appart. Et pourtant, ces gens sont bien plus misérables que moi. (aussi facile a vérifier, car j'occupe un poste difficile d'accès)
Et qu'elle en est la raison? Le français moyen est désarmé car il n'a que très peux de difficultés a surmonter!
Donc en quelque sorte, ce facteur chance ne fonctionne pas tout a fait comme vous le pensez!
Et la société couve de plusnen plus les gens car c'est le meilleur moyen de contrôle. Que peux-tu faire si t'es las d'accord avec la société qui te loge, te nourrit et te divertit?
Aussi, nous voyons de plus en plus de personnes à la rue, car actuellement, moins de 25% de la société font vivre les 75%. Ce n'est pas tenable et le résultat est un sustème qui ne sait plus traiter les démunis correctement. Sans oublier le gaspillage burreaucratique (il faut plus de gens pour gérer et c'est plus de gens qui confondent leurs poches).
Bref, si la France continue l'anti-mérotocratie, elle se vénézuelarisera, puis tombera.
D'autant que plus la redistribution est forte, plus les personnes revoient leurs priorités. Dès qu'un salaire universel garantit tombe, je cesse de travailler pour m'occuper de recherches personelles à plein temps, faire du bénévolat et programmer quelques jeux.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
In Belgium, we are in a very nasty situation with employment foo decades. The government pays unemployment benefits and the longer you stay unemployed, the more companies hiring you get benefits. That means that if you get unemployed, employers will refuse you has they can have a much better deal for cheaper (someone with same skills, but for whom the state pays half the check).
Those benefits are called WIN-WIN, PFI, Activa etc.
I got a job by playing the system and following a training that was useless for me, but which guaranteed a job... Quite sad!
Now that I have experience, it play in my favor, but I am soon maxing it out and going out of that sweet spot. I'll be to expensive and if I lose my job, I'll have to follow the same cycle and accept a lower wage because the state actually pushes for lower wages overall.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
To give a practical example, I did a project for advanced form validation with configuration provided by the user.
I need to have literal values, computed values, and fields at some point.
The whole implementation has no clue about the fields themselves or where the value comes from.
It just asks something else: what is the value of field X? What is the value linked to some variable Y ?
Later, another dev had to implement the same feature in another technology.
It was a copy-paste, and all he had to rewrite was the part answering the two questions above.
It was so unfathomable to him that he didn't even understand that it was all he needed to do.
It was so strong that I had to ask him to take control, do the copy-paste, and write a few lines of code with him...then it just worked.
The other nicety is that testing was much more straightforward. The core worked, so only the pluggable part had to be tested for his specific project, which was as easy as reading the code to confirm it did what it should.
And yes, it looks weird to have a class that required a FieldLocator and ValueLocator, but that made it easy to port.
It also makes the core more high-level and reusable. You don't have to read some documentation to have an outline of the algorithm; the class is so short you can read it at a glance.
It's the kind of code a junior would refactor to "reduce complexity" or "flatten the object graph." 😂
And I saw that at play. I wrote a set of decorator classes in one company to implement different concerns. There were like 5 types involved, and it looked like this: new A(new B(new C()))
I quit, and someone wrote that by merging the content of each class. The company asked me if I could give them a hand because it hadn't worked since the rewrite.
Yeah, that's why it was done the way it was done. To ease adding and removing features without confusing oneself passing a train of booleans to the method ^^
It is also much faster in a test; you can just initialize your service, omitting one decorator (the one making requests to a third party for legal reasons).
"It's over-engineered" or "It's written academically" is a cope for "Albeit it looks simple, I am uncomfortable with it, so I will rewrite everything, and it will be bristle."
1
-
1
-
@kr5754 I had the case of one girl who "challenged" me and she was much heavier. I deflected her for some time and became tired, so I had to give her a shock so she understand that I could have been done from the get go. I took her head and slammed it on a wall, cushioning the impact with my hand at the very last.
If I didn't do that, she would have beaten me up for good. In the end, she had nothing and I had a crushed hand. It also established that I am a crazy guy and nobody should toy with me... And she wasn't able to complain, because I spent 99% of the time deflecting her, trying to get her to understand she can't really do anything. If she was skinnier, I would have pushed her a bit and locked her until she calm down. Same with guys. Except that I will warn guys that I am going to kill them, because we learned that when you're in a real fight, it's cheaper to put down someone than handicap him...And as soon you do martial arts, you are responsible and have higher charges. The law is just very stupid in that regard.
1
-
1
-
The "be prepared" is not "have your wallet in your hand". It's about not taking risk to keep it.
I was once attacked by 3 people who wanted my phone and one was able to grab me. In my head, I had a plan:
- Run the shoe acroos his leg, then kick with the ass (very effective)
- With the momemntum, hit the throat of the one facing me
- Third one looked unsure about what they did, so he would not fight
Then the guy showed a nice knife.
At that point, I said "Ok, can I just take my SIM card before handing you the phone ?".
There are situations where one can't do anything.
In another attack, they were two and they will always rember as I kicked their ass. They attacked by behind and by the time I realized, I was already on the floor (they hit the knees).
I had my phone in my right hand, so I pulled the guy who was sitting and started to kick him with legs and I stun him. Gave few left punches too.
The other one flew like a coward when I stood up and the one I punched jumped in the bush by fear of a longer treatment 😁
Then I ran in a school for protection because these guys operate in crowd of 10-15 people. I called a friend and when we left the building, around 10 people were waiting for me!
Of you are in good shape, you can easily take 2 or 3 of them. With martial art training, 7 should be ok.
But with knifes in hand, it's another story.
That's why guns are not a bad idea. Or at least pepper spray. For the first, without training, not sure it's usefull.
1
-
So much people who do not understand how vaccination work...
Vaccination doesn't prevent infection at all. It prevent filling beds in hospitals and help with recovery as it train immune system to defense against the virus. That means that if you get sick, your immune system will quickly wipe it out, but you'll still be infected and infectious.
Now, it may actually reduce for how long you're infectious.
It's why vaccines are still useful.
By now way the vaccine immunize for covid, in no ways. It lessen it. That's why you still have to keep your distances and get others to wear masks (the mask is not to protect yourself, but other!!!).
Those are the basics that almost everyone got wrong and that explain stupid behaviors.
Also, we need multiple vaccines, not because the vaccine is per itself ineffective, but because the virus mutates to a point that the immune system don't even recognize it as effectively or doesn't even have the means to defend the body.
It's also why some people appear sick from the vaccine, because the immune system doesn't know it can let it go and just do his maximum to battle it. Which is the exact purpose of the vaccine!
It's not some magical things that protect you of diseases. What protect you from diseases are the immune defenses you create through the training sessions that each jab represent.
The analogy of tacking a vaccine is more like sending your troops in a real life training on the battle field than giving them a magic potion.
Another analogy is having football players playing a lot of matches prior going to the tournament.
If you can't see that, you've to study how vaccine really works.
As for masks, it's to filter out water droplets you expel when you breath and cough. It's why masks with valves, even if they are impressive and allow to go in toxic environment, just sucks compared to plain fiber masks.
And comically enough, that the same people that will call other stupid.
1
-
They clearly have mental issues. When I have discussions, they assume my parents are rich.
At least, richer than the average. So, I am the devil!
Except my parent was the state for my 18 first years, then after I only had a father.
So, yeah, had a huge handicap to start live (on top of that, autism).
Still, miles ahead of those idiots who are manipulated by people who only seek power.
They do not even realize because they think they will get free stuff and in some extent, it's true as I am one of the guy paying for them.
Then they complain because they can't have more. Not realizing how much they already got for not contributing.
Economics is totally foreign to them, as is effort.
1
-
This should just be bonus. Elon is inquiring around and suddenly, there is a miracle whistle blower ?
It's like I said to a friend about a customer he has: do not prepare for the current situation or what you perceive, prepare for the worse. So, in the worse case, you will just smile and say FY. If you don't prepare, then you will have to react to the worse case and it's much much tougher. Especially because you will have less time, more stress and much less vision to piece evidence together, even if today it seems obvious.
I went to court and my file was filled to the brim, as such that if one thing didn't pass, I had 10 other things. Obviously, it atomized the other party.
It's how it work, complainer say something, you dismantle with ease because you're prepared. Everything they say is refuted, then you can start to pile all the lies with evidences and they can't have proper defense for all, especially if you are smart enough to leverage contradictions and have them realize that now, they have to chose the truth that will be the less costly to them. Meaning you just won.
And yes, it takes time and dedication without a lawyer. You have to understand consolidated laws, match with your points to have a solid ground and push through, even if "obviously they broke the law". The judge can interpret and give passes, but he can't be obnoxious with that. It's a number game.
And to be fair, I first lost the case with an attorney who had solid evidence and thus, stopped at that, thinking it was enough. Dismissed him during the calendar and worked my ass on the file. Not telling it's the brightest idea I got, but it worked well.
I do think Elon will follow the same route. Whatever how good it looks for him, he will dig deeper. At least, I hope so.
In the end, it's good for everyone, except for tyrants.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I did a presentation showing how isomorphisms are very useful to solve problems because you can end up with an easier model or an already solved problem. What you keep by doing this is also an invariant: intrinsic properties.
One example is: can you order a list of 3 digits binary numbers so you start with 000 and end with 111 by changing only one digit from one number to the next ? This is similar to finding a path between two opposite vertex of a cube, which is much less challenging. If you try the same with 4 digits binary numbers (0000 to 1111), you end up doing this on a tesseract that you can flatten as a simple graph or two connected cubes.
Showing $$\sum C(2,n) = n^2 $$ can be done by seeing that binary numbers can represent all the combinations in a set. As an example 101 means: pick first, discard second, pick third.
Of course, when you are presented with these morphisms, you think "Yeah, that's stupid.". It's not.
Here is a nice problem that can be solved in that particular way: We create a 4 by 6 grid of vertices, how many rectangles can be drawn by connecting 4 vertices with horizontal and vertical segments ? Can you give a general solution for a m by n grid ?
Extension (that requires one to use the elegant solution): we create a 20 by 20 grid of vertices. We can identify each smallest possible square by it's row rank and column rank. We draw a dot in the square at 7,10. How many rectangles can be drawn by connecting 4 vertices with horizontal and vertical segments and enclose the dot ?
1
-
I always said that luck if a major factor and that's because I started with huge handicaps.
I spent 18 years in various institutions, which means that I had almost nothing and even buying school supplies was a challenge.
Factor in that for people we were the bottom of the bin, pure trash!
I even got papers marked zero in the process because my writings was "way above what I should be able to produce".
I was rejected for evening school for about the same reason (and ended up going into a full bachelor degree).
On the other side, I am born gifted and won prizes just for showing up.
People often ask me how hard I work and how I can know all those stuff...well, it's a gift.
I wanted to be a teacher, I did wait for years to get the right opportunity.
That is, training that is available after work.
Only in 2018 it started to appear here. So, now I can move on.
My current job is developer, when I am asked estimates, my reply is simple: undefined.
I am not paid to do what was already done. I am paid to do what other people can't.
As a result, I mostly don't even know what I am going to do. Just what the end product will achieve.
And luck is a big part!
On one project I had to do, it went from months to about 3 days.
I looked around and found a tool doing exactly what was needed if tweaked properly.
I even fixed a bug in it!
In another project, I had to save a consultant. It took me half a day, days were planned. Lucks too!
On top of that, I did nothing to have intelligence. No hard work or whatsoever.
And this creates problems when I work with others as my time is more valuable...in a literal way.
If I take 5 minutes to explain something, I can loose an hour worth of work of the same person.
And everyone is entitled to ask 5 minutes of my time because "If you take 5 minutes for me, I'll spare one hour".
Except they are not alone asking "only 5 minutes".
And then comes the issue of "This week I saw the team did a quarter of the work, what did happen ?".
The answer is pure butchery: "I helped everyone, so I had much less time to complete tasks".
It's totally unfair, unjust and sound pretentious. That's because it's unusual and your mind find it easier to think I am an asshole :-D
I also burned out since I was able to take any job, so one of my boss asked if I could do Y and my reply was "in no so long, yes". So, I ended up programming, doing support, managing servers, fixing devices, managing tablet fleet. That was too much and when I said my boss "I can't manage all of it anymore because I am overloaded", he thought I was having a tantrum! After all, I am able to do it all! The only job I did not do was "selling", because I have a tendency to be blunt.
I have also worked in that "back seat", mainly doing long time jobs and being a resource to "unblock" people in the team. That never last long as I am asked to "push thing through because we are late".
As a result, I work in a team of one. I am even switching career for peace of mind and because it is my dream job.
Luck plays a big role. What you can decide, though, is to let an opportunity pass; There you have real control.
Make the best of what you were given and remind yourself that if you get lucky, you have to make use of it.
1
-
1
-
@noneofyerbisness8702 ITIL V2 foundation insist on horizontal and vertical escalation. The issue to "face respectful and calm conversation" is that you are jeopardizing yourself too. It can quickly turn to "he said, I said" and the company will mostly take a nuclear option too for both, unless one of you give some edge.
The company can also just go with blaming you for not following the protocols. So, the loss far outweighs the gain and make this an objectively stupid move, a negative sum game.
On top of that, that's usually people in a bristle situation (newcomers) who do that mistake. That make it even a more stupid strategy.
It's why, in ITIL v2, the first escalation you attempt is through a colleague. Then if it doesn't work, the n+1, then colleague of n+1, then n+2 etc.
And you can't even rely on the other being generally a good guy, because psychology tells you that people compartmentalize their behavior. People try to be very coherent, even if it means doing absurd things, but they can also split their self. So, you never know their state of mind.
Those things did not come out of the blue ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
That wasn't even a "smart" own. Elon just asked the most basic thing that is usually easily brushed away: "give me one example". Then the remaining is just playing on coherence. The journalist was incoherent, that's why he was destroyed.
It's a bit like a mentally challenged girl we had in the institution. She went to a shop and stole something. When she came back, the educator asked her the remaining money. Because the girl was challenged, she couldn't do calculations, neither make big plans. So, she gave back all the money 😂
So, the educator asked how she got the "cracottes" and the girl explained the whole thing, including how hard it was for her to retain her respiration (she tucked the box under her skirt). Her punishment was to bring the box back. (Which was quite a punishment as the store was at the other side of the village and she would have to explain herself there).
She was caught because she wasn't coherent.
When I did interview people, coherence was a red flag. I did ask the same questions during the interview, but differently. "How long have you been active professionally ?", "Can we run through your projects, how long did you work here and there ?". Then depending on the number of occupation, you know that most people can be one or two years off. But if the guy is 5 years off, you can show the door.
Same with technical competence, you get asked "informally" (do you find PHP easy), more formally "Which PSR did you enact ?" and then tested.
If there is a discrepancy between those 🚩🚩
And in general, bad candidate are really good at raising 🚩.
The nice things with coherence is that you don't need to be overtly technical. Just need quite some practice and a good working memory and take notes ^^
I did also offer training for interviews and one guy was distributing red flags like crazy, to the point I became really angry at him and asked why tf he was doing that without any real reason. Happens that the guy was just a complete idiot... He got fired from the company.
And that's another thing, you try to build a profile, note that the guy is trying to flaunt you, then later on, realize that you totally misinterpret.
There was one interview where I had the CEO sitting next to me and I asked the candidate "What is the name of our company?". Because, from all previous answers I gathered, I had the impression he came to the wrong interview or was high. The CEO looked at me like "Did you really ask that ?".
And yes, that's a question that is quite insulting and disrespectful. But I had no choice to make progress in the interview, I had to eliminate those possibilities.
Another funny things is that too much coherence is also a red flag! We tend to mix things up, forget details and invent some. It's human ^^
Great liars are able to mimic that! Some are caught because they have "perfect stories". Also, firing quick question on incoherent part put such a great burden that you can quickly get to the truth! And that's without even accounting for body language.
As an example, when I trained that guy for the interview, the guy slowly turned his head, to the point that after few minutes he was looking on his right and not at me ^^ He was avoiding confrontation, slowly. And this is another thing: let people dig their grave. Don't highlight flaws as you see them, let it build up. Then from "inconsequential" it becomes "determining". But that's hard to do, you need to exert restraint as it's satisfying to get the "got ya".
Now, the question is: "Then how much coherence" and the answer is : if you tell the truth, you don't have to care. On top of that, there are socially acceptable lies.
If you were unemployed for 2 years and say that you took a rest or used those years to enjoy yourself, you'll not be looked down. Interviewers know it means "unemployed". If you try to cover the gap by saying you did one year more in the two surrounding employment, then 🚩🚩🚩.
I have a gap of two year in my CV. Always highlighted it and explained how difficult it was to find a job due to my profile. Actually leveraged the gap ^^
Next time you have a discussion, try to focus on just the coherence and see if you can spot probable lies ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Company is Wondershare, they offer other tools, including PDF handling tool. Screwed me and I am too lazy to make a video out of it, but the way they work, they will drain their customer base very fast! Good way to die fast!
In my case, their trial limited the merging to 3 PDFs. And that worked, so I went for the full version. They have a no refund condition as you can use their trial product, except I had to merge 40 documents (mixture of docx and PDFs) and there it didn't work. They did two fixes (had to install two special releases) and one was to not crash, but wait idle until the user decides to click cancel...very lame!
My guess is that they handle every refund case like that, so, once burned, not only their "users" will complain on the web, but they won't renew! So, massive scammy growth, followed by mega dip and crash.
In the end, I converted my DOCX through Word (what their app seems to do too), then I merged all the PDFs using affinity designer (That's where their app seems to fail). That workflow is in the end much better and robust and cheaper. By trying, buying and trying to use their app, Iost both time and money. So, they joined my "doubtful company" mental list.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It's a "production" kind of job where troubleshooting can be charted/diagrammed.
As you said, people pay you to not have to justify a soldering station in the kitchen etc.
You forgot to highlight that you can go off the [flow]chart because of your experience and practice.
You can deploy heuristics which come with experience.
I work in IT field. Kind of "All in one" in software industry. I can teach BPMN, UML, languages and design patterns (It's already a LOT! Can fill a life).
Thing is that people do not struggle with code or graphical language. Anyone can learn BPMN, C, or design patterns in few days. The big part is using those tool in the right way and being smart. There is a lot of human comprehension going on.
People find that "requirements gathering" phase is expensive because they see them as specifications and drawings they could have done themselves! The truth is that even with a tutorial, they could not. I requires practice, experience and a juicy brain.
We also invite people and give them valuable advice for free. They often not recognize them as valuable because we come with them quickly and they seem obvious when you hear them. But thinking about it in the first place require experience and/or a juicy brain.
I like how you see business. I believe we share this view: "There is business opportunity when people can create plus-value for other people".
Today business is more about draining value from customer. Good business is when you can do things better, faster and cheaper for someone else.
If I need a board repair, sure, I can attempt it and use your video. But I will take twice or more your time for a potentially good result. If I pay you two third of what it would cost me, I did a gain. I can spend that time doing something else. Maybe providing a service to someone else who will pay me two thirds of the time/means he would need.
Magically, we have "free money". The total value increased!
But business do not looks like this. People do not see it that way. They want to maximize their profit and reduce their cost and do it by overselling and underpaying. So, they are victim of it. Total value increase is on decline; It's not yet negative because some people share the "plus-value" vision and slow down the process: Not everyone is selfish.
It's not anymore a trade economy...
Thanks for your videos!
1
-
1
-
16:00 D'où l'intérêt des études. J'ai eu un car où ça m'a mis 5 minutes pour expliquer la solution à un problème qui avait fait galérer les sys-admins/dba.
Ils avaient une base de donnée de plusieurs GB non indexée et ils voulaient supprimer les plus vieilles entrées pour ne garder qu'un an.
3 semaines pour étudier différents plans, y inclus celui d'avoir deux DB en parallèle pendant un an, puis switcher 😅 (pas faisable, mais solution quand-même)
J'entends parler de ça, donc je vais les voir puis je leur explique que l'ID (rowid) et la date sont corrélés. Quand l'id croît, la date aussi. Du coup, tout ce qu'ils ont a faire, c'est de trier par ID puis effectuer une recherche dichotomique sur la datte. Soit, une dizaine de requêtes pour obtenir 1ID. Chaque requête prenant moins qu'une milliseconde.
Puis, une fois les deux id obtenus, un petit delete. Rapide et propre. Je rigolais tellement c'était basique. Et les devs impressionnés à qui j'ai répondu que c'est "from the book".
Zéro réflexion pour trouver ça! Problème de recherche sur un critère qui est dans une liste triée accessible par un index ? --> recherche dichotomique en log(n).
Et il y a plein de truc comme ça.
Par exemple, quand je dois valider une saisie où les regex font pas l'affaire --> machine a état.
Alors oui, c'est 3 ans d'études, mais avec des profs qui prennent le temps de te mettre devant des problèmes récurrents et les théories idoines pour les résoudre en 5 secondes.
Le but des études, c'est de s'armer d'outils de base plus rapidement. Donc ça devient attendu, qu'à un certain niveau d'étude, on se retrouve inspiré par ce qu'on a étudié.
Après, là où c'est gênant, c'est quand on a fait des études où on a pas été exposé à assez de variété. (Il y a des profs qui ont un dada et qui du coup négligent le reste!)
On avait un gar qui voyait du Horner et Pythagore dans tout les problèmes. A un moment, même le prof n'en pouvait plus! Le plus comique, c'est qu'une fois, la méthode d'Horner était utile, donc le prof a fait aller le gars au tableau pour qu'il puisse enfin se faire plaisir...le gars s'est fait démonter et on a bien rigolé🤣
En plus, tout confiant et tout 😂
À force, on le prenant pour un expert 😅
J'ai déjà eu la blague aussi, où le prof propose un défi, puis je dis au prof "aller, directement au tableau" et en pleine résolution, je me rend compte que ça coince et je dois rétropédaler ^^
Mais là le prof ne casse pas et reconnaît que ça fait partie du procédé de résolution ^^
Enfin, bref, quand on fait de bonnes études, elles servent ^^ Et quand ce n'est pas directement la matière, c'est la méthodologie. On apprend aussi a rechercher, poser un cadre de travail, une structure et a être flexible aussi. Chaque prof ayant sa vision et chaque sujet nécessitant différents moyens.
Par exemple, quand je faisait électromécanique, je passais un temps fous dans des calculs précis (symboliques). Puis le prof m'a fait remarquer qu'on travaillait avec des composants ayant des marges de 10% à 30%. Et quand tu fais tes calculs d'erreurs une erreur d'un facteur 10 peut largement passer. (Calculer 100 ou 1 à la place de 10)
Donc du coup, tu commence a faire des trucs du genre: "10+1=10" car ça t'arrange pour tes calculs. Tu regardes la spec sheet et tu vois une belle quadratique que tu considère linéaire car c'est plus simple etc.
Puis après, tu passes au traitement du signal où même respirer à côté de ton circuit pourrait être problématique et où tes délais de propagation sont en femtosecondes et donc utiliser une table de lookup (PAL) pourrait être mieux que d'utiliser plusieurs portes logiques. Et tu te retrouves à tester, tester, tester ^^
Pourtant, dans les deux cas, tu travail dans l'électronique. Mais dans le premier cas, à la louche, ça passe.
Et même en automates, tu peux te retrouver dans un cas où l'autre. Par exemple, des portes automatiques qui se referment sur quelqu'un, c'est pas la mort. Donc le truc est surtout mécanique et lent à réagir, mais tu t'en fout. Pareil pour la gestion de consignes pour le chauffage. Là ou tu t'en fout moins, c'est quand tu programmes un bras qui fait partie d'une chaîne d'opération, le truc doit être synchro avec le reste et le plus rapide possible, un petit accroc est c'est la cata ^^
Et encore une fois, quand t'arrives au boulot, tu fais assez vite l'association avec ce que tu as vu durant tes études et c'est un bon point de départ!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bccsivxx-xxivvii It makes it easier for companies. If they want someone to take decisions that can jeopardize the company's future, they have to have someone fitting the D level. So, when you move from one company to the other, regardless of your salary, they can see your level. (unless A or B)
Now, it's not a cast system. If you do great in a company and they want to increase your salary, they will put you in the class above (because you also take more responsibility).
For the state, though, the diploma plays an important role. And, confusingly, there is another classification of employees going from F to A...where A is the highest 😅
It's nice until you see that an employee is both D and A ^^
With my bachelor's degree, I am level B/A for the state. (level B, but can be considered for A positions)
But in the private sector...D ^^
Ironically, in the private sector, it's about your real competencies and for the state, your diploma. So, the private sector is much fairer than the state.
Oh, and also, if you have prior experience in the private sector, the state cut your work time history in 2. (how long you worked is taken into account for your pay in state employment)
Now, there is a nice thing for the state, you can take tests and climb the ladder. So, if you are incompetent but good at memorizing stuff you can be promoted. Also, you have a kind of trial in front of some employees, but usually, it's nothing as it goes about whether they like you or not.
So, things are not as simple.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Be warned, the coming lines are hard to read as you will be fighting against your own biases. IF YOU ARE EASILY IMPRESSED, DO NOT READ FURTHER!
This is some filler to say that there is nothing wrong in being easily impressed and that's your last chance to stop reading. Next paragraph is the rough stuff.
Some German guy did atrocious experiments on humans and it benefited the society... Today "scientist" conflate science with "political correctness" and are eager to invalidate (or more precisely, not validate) the findings. There is a moral and ethical component for it (the guy did torture people for his experiments), but even what can be replicated is often dismissed (mostly the psychological studies which did happen in questionable conditions, but could be replicated with people consent without real damage. One of his finding was that trucks should be equipped with a small source of light to be used right before opening doors, so deported would not try to breach the door. He also premiered the Milgram experiment, he was one of the first to understand how to get total obedience of unwilling people without having to menace them! (Milgram experiment is a setup to replicate those findings, the scenario is more or less ethical -- since someone really believe they are torturing someone else, which is by itself very damaging)
It's an example that from evil, good can be produced. Because to make evil things, he had to do things that the good guy can't do AND it brought benefits good guys could never reap.
It almost sound "apologetic" to that 1940 guy, but that's because you are not reading what is written. You are victime of a bias ^^
So, to be clear, that guy was evil and if you consider why I wrote this and how I describe the experiments, you'll see I despise him.
It's a good exercise to fight against your biases and you should probably save this and read it every month as an exercise if you even though one second that it was an apology to that guy!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@egobrain6826 Omg, what you wrote sounds stupid. Not everyone even has a job. Not everyone can even work. I know that most people in the streets are men, but there are also women.
In the same vein, there are women working and still not able to make it through the end of the month and having to chose between eating, paying bills and getting higienic products.
Not everyone is a student living in momy and dady house either.
It's too easy to brush off that issue by blaming others, isn't it. It certainly makes you much more comfortable.
Get to know and keep in mind that we have very different paths in life and not every course of action is our design. I was myself a ward of the state and got punished by extra-stupid teachers with the same discours as yours. That if I didn't buy video games, candy, the latest nikes and technology gadgets, then I would be able to buy the calculator, ruler, compass and all the material he required. Ah yes, with almost 1$ of pocket a month, sure, I would be able to afford a 60$ calculator...I ended up yielling at that teacher after one of the lesson, to explain him that some pupils are ward of the state and that he should have some awareness instead of making our lives harder than it is.
I wish you to live an eye opening exeprience, like being on the street for a few days or having an abusing landlord. Not for too long, just the time to realise how stupid it sounds to write "they just have to".
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Asto508 So, you know and still give attitude 😅
Simple questions are made to target one skill.
That overlap question allows to see how analytical you are. If you have many edge cases, you are already going too fast for your own good. That means you didn't explore the problem at all.
If you do a bit of exploration, then it becomes trivial.
And indeed, problems you'll have at work (in my domain, which is heavy tree-to-tree transformation driven by tree) will be much more complex. So, the questions must be straightforward and probe what is essential. The rest can be learned.
If I were in management systems, which you are probably (e-commerce, ERP, cutom sites, stock management, ...) then you can have a talk "how would you xxx" as it's a good teller if somebody did something.
I could not afford that!
Also, part of my methodology comes from my background in psychotechnics and testing. I was trained in proctoring intelligence tests and practiced for two years. That heavily influenced how I did recruit.
And I know that candidates despised it, because they came prepared with a good script and showcases, then I ask them what makes an HTTP request, why an architecture is unsuitable or to identify what's wrong in a code fragment.
I even fashioned an arithmetic problem in my revised interviews because I felt that it would be an high discriminant. It was 😂
You can disagree; I filtered a lot of candidates but only got rock stars.
For me, that's a good enough proof I did somethig right and a great source of pride and satisfaction.
Diversity of hiring practices ensure that more people find a job! In my interviews, even those who could not sell themselves were hired.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@buster9877 The original question is indeed with a better naming and a mkre descriptive name.
The question is really good when you know its purpose.
That question is deceptively simple and will throw of people like Astro.
If you explore the problem by drawing the few situations, you will see that there are 15 cases. Which is way too much to handle.
That's where you analytical skills need to kick in.
You would see that there are only 2 cases where there is no overlap, it's when the other set is completely to the left or to the right. And because that's the negation of what you need to implement, you can write the negated condition of "isDisjoint()".
While this level of thinking is not really needed in management systems (where you mostly deal with retrieving and displaying data), it's a basic foundation in my domain since you'll have to solve complex problem each day.
On example I had was:
Text formatting is being represented as a tree of formatting node as such that each node has only 3 values:
- The formatting being applied (bold, italic or underline)
- The children
- The text fragment
Create an array which can be read left to right which can be given to a formatter which will read it sequentially. Each even position will contains an object describing if the folowing text need to be bolded, underlined or italicized, every odd entries will contain the text subjected to the previous entry.
Example: (b("tests",u("another)) -> [{b:true},"tests",{u:true,b:true},"another"]
A bit harder than "overlaps/4".
Yet, that's expected to be no more than 30 minute of work.
(It doesn't use any trick and use basic primitives for working with trees)
Tge irony is that I don't ask questions about trees, because one who can solve an array of problems can learn idioms to deal with trees very easily. The hardest part is solving the problem in a reasonable time.
I also had an arithmetic question and a lot of candidates complaines because they didn't do maths for quite some time. Happens that good abalysis is closely related to math 😅 So, that's a proxy for their raw analysis skills and the "not my job" behavior.
Good questions are rarely what they seem to be. Candidates lie ^^
1
-
@Coach-Solar_Hound The original question is indeed with a better naming and a more descriptive name.
The question is really good when you know its purpose.
That question is deceptively simple and will throw of people like Astro.
If you explore the problem by drawing the few situations, you will see that there are 15 cases. Which is way too much to handle.
That's where you analytical skills need to kick in.
You would see that there are only 2 cases where there is no overlap, it's when the other set is completely to the left or to the right. And because that's the negation of what you need to implement, you can write the negated condition of "isDisjoint()".
While this level of thinking is not really needed in management systems (where you mostly deal with retrieving and displaying data), it's a basic foundation in my domain since you'll have to solve complex problem each day.
On example I had was:
Text formatting is being represented as a tree of formatting node as such that each node has only 3 values:
- The formatting being applied (bold, italic or underline)
- The children
- The text fragment
Create an array which can be read left to right which can be given to a formatter which will read it sequentially. Each even position will contains an object describing if the folowing text need to be bolded, underlined or italicized, every odd entries will contain the text subjected to the previous entry.
Example: (b("tests",u("another)) -> [{b:true},"tests",{u:true,b:true},"another"]
A bit harder than "overlaps/4".
Yet, that's expected to be no more than 30 minute of work.
(It doesn't use any trick and use basic primitives for working with trees)
Tge irony is that I don't ask questions about trees, because one who can solve an array of problems can learn idioms to deal with trees very easily. The hardest part is solving the problem in a reasonable time.
I also had an arithmetic question and a lot of candidates complaines because they didn't do maths for quite some time. Happens that good abalysis is closely related to math 😅 So, that's a proxy for their raw analysis skills and the "not my job" behavior.
Good questions are rarely what they seem to be. Candidates lie ^^
1
-
1
-
@Coach-Solar_Hound The original question is indeed with a better naming and a more descriptive name.
The question is really good when you know its purpose.
That question is deceptively simple and will throw of people like Astro.
If you explore the problem by drawing the few situations, you will see that there are 15 cases. Which is way too much to handle.
That's where you analytical skills need to kick in.
You would see that there are only 2 cases where there is no overlap, it's when the other set is completely to the left or to the right. And because that's the negation of what you need to implement, you can write the negated condition of "isDisjoint()".
While this level of thinking is not really needed in management systems (where you mostly deal with retrieving and displaying data), it's a basic foundation in my domain since you'll have to solve complex problem each day.
On example I had was:
Text formatting is being represented as a tree of formatting node as such that each node has only 3 values:
- The formatting being applied (bold, italic or underline)
- The children
- The text fragment
Create an array which can be read left to right which can be given to a formatter which will read it sequentially. Each even position will contains an object describing if the folowing text need to be bolded, underlined or italicized, every odd entries will contain the text subjected to the previous entry.
Example: (b("tests",u("another)) -> [{b:true},"tests",{u:true,b:true},"another"]
A bit harder than "overlaps/4".
Yet, that's expected to be no more than 30 minute of work.
(It doesn't use any trick and use basic primitives for working with trees)
Tge irony is that I don't ask questions about trees, because one who can solve an array of problems can learn idioms to deal with trees very easily. The hardest part is solving the problem in a reasonable time.
I also had an arithmetic question and a lot of candidates complaines because they didn't do maths for quite some time. Happens that good abalysis is closely related to math 😅 So, that's a proxy for their raw analysis skills and the "not my job" behavior.
Good questions are rarely what they seem to be. Candidates lie ^^
1
-
@Coach-Solar_Hound The original question is indeed with a better naming and a more descriptive name.
The question is really good when you know its purpose.
That question is deceptively simple and will throw of people like Astro.
If you explore the problem by drawing the few situations, you will see that there are 15 cases. Which is way too much to handle.
That's where you analytical skills need to kick in.
You would see that there are only 2 cases where there is no overlap, it's when the other set is completely to the left or to the right. And because that's the negation of what you need to implement, you can write the negated condition of "isDisjoint()".
While this level of thinking is not really needed in management systems (where you mostly deal with retrieving and displaying data), it's a basic foundation in my domain since you'll have to solve complex problem each day.
On example I had was:
Text formatting is being represented as a tree of formatting node as such that each node has only 3 values:
- The formatting being applied (bold, italic or underline)
- The children
- The text fragment
Create an array which can be read left to right which can be given to a formatter which will read it sequentially. Each even position will contains an object describing if the folowing text need to be bolded, underlined or italicized, every odd entries will contain the text subjected to the previous entry.
Example: (b("tests",u("another)) -> [{b:true},"tests",{u:true,b:true},"another"]
A bit harder than "overlaps/4".
Yet, that's expected to be no more than 30 minute of work.
(It doesn't use any trick and use basic primitives for working with trees)
Tge irony is that I don't ask questions about trees, because one who can solve an array of problems can learn idioms to deal with trees very easily. The hardest part is solving the problem in a reasonable time.
I also had an arithmetic question and a lot of candidates complaines because they didn't do maths for quite some time. Happens that good abalysis is closely related to math 😅 So, that's a proxy for their raw analysis skills and the "not my job" behavior.
Good questions are rarely what they seem to be. Candidates lie ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I've done technical recruitment and I couldn't tell if candidate leaned right or left. Wrote a protocol and followed it to the letter.
Even went as far as being able to give a rank to each candidate based on what the company found most relevant (weighted scoring system).
A manage told me that I wasn't doing properly and I just politely told him to fuck off. Each non forced hires I got was very successful.
Any recruiter will tell you that ratio such as 7 out of 10 good candidate is a chimera. But almost no recruiter even know about the protocol thing, neither have real technical background and good knowledge in psychology and psychometric. Yet, they attempt to run evaluations...
Even for the CV, I looked at the hobby and vaguely at the remaining. Just because as part of the protocol, I had to ask a question to check if the hobby is indeed real. (it's one of the flag that permit to spot liars)
I have also seen heart breaking things. I had a black candidate who flunk the tests, but showed high potential (so, bad technically, but with a really good reasoning even if answer were wrong). So, I told him he was hired and he asked me if it was because of his skin color...
Another candidate was a girl who was very pleasant, but I had to reject her to very bad ranking. She asked me if she was the only girl, I replied that this is indeed the case (it was programming) and she was puzzled, so much that she told me that she believed she will have the job because of quotas (doesn't apply in small structures)!
I also saw one funny candidate. He came in short, tong and not really shaved. The interview was for a PHP position...but he couldn't write a line of PHP. So, I told him he can use pseudo code to solve the problem section. He was able to read PHP and answer basic architectural questions. Definitely a good hire. In 3 weeks, he outperformed the best of the team!
Reducing people to a number is something most people hate, but it can be done correctly and gives the best results. Otherwise, you're subject to many biases, like most recruiters.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@_Common_Logic_ Still disadvantaging those who don't see the need.
As an example, I did my Bachelor in industrial computing, but it wasn't really a requirement for the field. If I was OK with a lower salary and simpler occupation, I could have taken a job just by being competent. Sure, no big responsibilities, but still a job most people can't do as it's mostly based on problem solving skills. So, I would be more apt to vote than an PhD in Gender Studies, yet, I couldn't vote!
A better approach would be to assess people like in 3% shows.
Not necessarily on intligence though, but on comprehention, ability to work with data...like the SAT or GRE...but those a linked to IQ 🤣
So, unfortunately, IQ is too good for his original purpose ^^
Now, the thing is that people are more receptive to SAT or GRE than classical IQ tests like WAISIIIr.
And the score doesn't even have to be very high as the goal is simply to ensure that people are able to acquire and process knowledge correctly.
But good luck to implement that ^^
A middle ground would be to have the votes weighted with a cap. As such that very intelligent people do not get too much weight and that really stupid people would have minimal weight.
But even that would be hard to swallow.
In the end, everyone equal appease everyone and by sheer number we can expect average to bright people to dwarf others.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Even with simple problems, a friend is puzzled on how I know to add something or assume something to progress. When he look at it, it's like I just know.
Reality is that at some point, I stop and ask: "What would be convenient ?" or "What am I missing here ?".
Often time, it means I need to add/drop a constraint or add something I know.
That part is the hidden path and most people can't see it.
It's a close cousin of decomposition where you assume some part of the problem is already solved. This works very well in computing/programming.
It also means that you should gather your thoughts at the same abstraction level. Changing the level of abstraction has a cost!
As an example, I had to deal with real time software and high concurrency. I used high level primitives then implemented them.
This lead on a rock solid solution that was FAST.
The already existing solution was "optimized" (i.e. avoiding unnecessary abstractions), but slower and plenty of bugs (almost each corner case was a reason).
On top of that, the first solution took 3 years, the second only 8 days spread across 2 months.
Mathematicians (and good software programmers) can go very far by using proper abstraction and refrain to unnecessarily switch to another level of abstraction.
It's like doing all your calculations in symbolic form before evaluating.
Lastly, there is some political correctness, but mathematics (and programming) require a brain; It's not the forte of everyone and that's fine.
1
-
Basic budgeting was taught in primary school in Belgium, even compound interests. But most people forget about that after a few years of secondary school.
Obviously, it's taught more simply, and we don't solve for x^^
We used to learn to compute simple expressions and do introductory algebra where we wrote complete sentences like "Let B be Bernard, Let C be Charlotte."
Then, the first two years of secondary school were a review of the previous years and formalization.
But I know it changed a lot, and usually, pupils don't even know introductory algebra anymore when they enter secondary school and even struggle with the language.
While mastering the language was a prerequisite to leaving primary school. I still have a book containing problems for 10-year-olds that I can give to adults and stump them because the vocabulary is too advanced.
And that evolution is normal. People did stop school after primary school, so it was important that by age 12, you were fully functional and able to teach yourself. Hence the emphasis on "preparations".
Then, school was mandatory until age 18 (Since 1983), so there was more time to learn the subject and prepare pupils. "Preparations" became "homework," too.
It's also why some people from the '80s and '90s got an "advanced" education: schools were slow to adapt. So, we ended up with a mixture of pupils with almost nothing to learn and pupils drowning under the material.
I came from a school that didn't adapt, and I thought people were downright idiots and didn't understand why we were taught the same stuff again. And I was not alone.
And teachers knew that, too. That was a transition period.
The downside of the old system was that you had your childhood stolen. School was a serious thing. We were made adults too soon.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jweezy101491 Red is #F00, whatever I feel about it. And because it's part of web-safe colors.
When I say I want red as defined in WebSafe colors, any developer knowing what is a definition will use the exact color I am thinking of. You would not, but most developers would.
You are demonstrating primitive relativism. Relativism is not a bad philosophical movement, in fact, it shows a slight understanding of our own grasp of the world and is sane. But primitive relativism is dangerous. It's one of the gateway to the worse you can find in people.
As an example, I am strongly confident that you strongly believe that theft is subjective and highly depend on whom, why and who is the victime.
And yes, a word can have multiple definitions!
Also, you were taught what "red" is and when you are using "red", you mean "a shade of red". The fact that you misuse a word and that it is understood by everyone doesn't make the initial definition disappear. Neither make the object defined to vanish or lost his signifier.
You can better your grasp by having more granularity and fluency in your speech. Next time, try to say "shade of red".
The next issue will be to understand what is actually a shade of a color. It's more complicated than you think, because of color spaces! As an exemple, in CSS, shades of red start at #F00 down to #100, but adding white is not possible (so, no tint).
So, the thing is that most definitions will be out of grasp for you (too technical) and it will give you the impression of being under defined. The fact that you also use the name of a color instead of stating it's a shade of it, also entertain the illusion.
You've an easier time with light, because you accept that this is a universal constant and a fixed value. While this is not entirely true, but a useful simplification.After all, we always measured forth and back. Also, with a by of knowledge in metrology, you would see that speed of light is "by definition". The speed of light is expressed in meter per second and the meter is defined with the speed of light....Yay, circular definition!
So, the number we got for the speed of light is totally arbitrary.
Same with the definition of "red", "table", "liquid".
The speed of light, pi, and color "red" are equally well defined.
1
-
@jweezy101491 Nice try, but there is a huge issue, you are a Ph.D. scientist who can't grasp definitions.
Simply put, a definition is nothing else than a way to make something definite.
I am an IT specialist, properly defining things is what yield my paycheck. Code doesn't care about your gut feeling!
Again, if you take "red" it's well defined. As well as the speed of light. As you know, the speed of light has not been measured. We could only measure its average speed. Currently, we see the speed of light as a limit, yet we accept an expanding universe going faster than it. It's just that models work well.
Also, as you should know, universal constants are probably not constants, but they stay proportionally constant. Meaning that our models stay valid for now. And as you know, it's the reason why we study universes with different rules and had even created them.
So, yeah, it's as much of a precise of "red" by Pentone or W3c.
And you would think that axiom, on which all your maths works are stronger than definitions. Well, no, those are chosen as such that they make a set from which it's not necessary to add something and from which you can't remove something while staying valid and consistent.
Now, your confusion stems from the fact that you don't speak properly and can't see the difference between "well-defined" and "defined".
"A table is something with 4 legs" is under-defined. Indeed, you would agree that a cat is not a table. Though it has 4 legs. It's still a definition though and would work very well in a world where only tables have 4 legs. (that's where your Ph.D. head goes "kaboom")
In IT, our definitions have to be more precise. When someone says " red", we instantly recognize that, like you, he meant "shade of red". So, we will ask to pick a more precise definition.
Back at universal constants, those are true for most physics. Try them near black holes, especially at the horizon 🤣
(not only, those are probably not constant per se, but they show locality!)
So, you managed to show you don't understand definition, the world of physics, and particularly light. You are not even up to date. For someone in the field, that was disastrous and to be honest, enough to be fired. Unless you work cheap without real impact...
Just to blow your mind: "a 3-headed dog that in Greek mythology guards the entrance to Hades" is as well defined as the number 1. (dumbed it down, because I realize that π may seem mystical, while "1" is better understood)
I think we did the whole your of it and if you really have a Ph.D., then you are doing yourself a huge disfavor. I am also sharing the question "What is a definition?" and its follow-up on "red" as it seems very good to test one's with basic knowledge! Thank you very much!
1
-
1
-
Pour une vraie méritocratie, il faut supprimer tout ce qui est du ressort de la discrimination positive.
Il faut s'assure de l'égalité des chances. L'État doit donc pourvoir fournir une bonne éducation (donc il faut pour cela investir grandement dans l'éducation), des ventres bien remplis (pour cela, il faut rationaliser les cantines: plat unique et pas cher), être habillé décemment (uniforme obligatoire, fournit par l'état) et l'internat obligatoire.
Je suis moi-même passé en institution, je faisais partie de la tranche la plus pauvre. Pourtant, j'ai bien réussis dans la vie. Et ça tient du fait que les bibliothèques (ou "la") était accessible. Aussi, j'ai été diagnostiqué autiste étant petit, mais aussi surdoué.
C'est le seul "hic". Certains ont en effets des aptitudes innées bien supérieures au reste de la population et son donc extrêmement avantagés dans une méritocratie. Je le vois en effet tout les jours. Je crée des solutions 30 fois plus vite que les collègues, je suis responsable des implémentations les plus ardues. Donc forcément, j'ai un meilleur traitement et je peux me permettre bien plus de choses. D'un autre côté, pour la société, j'apporte énormément et cela bénéficie à tout le monde. La réciprocité est donc normale, même si d'un regard simpliste, je suis "privilégié".
C'est en cela que c'est difficile. Il faut pouvoir accepter qu'on apporte pas tous la même chose à la société et qu'il est donc légitime de recevoir moins de cette société.
Si on suit un modèle "solidaire", les plus capables vont simplement s'adapter et se la jouer cool (cruising). Et comme on est face à une distribution de paretto (peu de gens remplissent la majorité des besoins) qui deviendrait artificiellement plane, la société s'effondrerait assez rapidement. Car oui, si le travail peut être fait en 1h au lieu de 8, pas mal ne se priveront pas de prendre 7h de relax si fournir plus que les autres ne leur apporte rien.
Et le "cruising" est largement répandu dans les entreprises où le salaire est sur barème (dépend uniquement du grade et de l'ancienneté), c'est aussi ce qui explique le dysfonctionnement des fonctionnaires!
Donc il faut faire très attention à ce qu'on désire.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chunchunmaru3644 No, because those YES/NO questions are challenging something very precise and so it's more controlled.
If there was multiple possible answers depending on how you think, these could "average out" and give more distributed results.
Now, when I create items (for fun), I do have propositions that permit me to know what wen wrong. So, on some of them, I can see if you are using shortcuts wrongly, trying to reuse prior logic or if you are failing to see a specific kind of parameter.
As an example, this question worked well because you got primed by the two first question. So you handled digits as distinct entity in each bracket because that was the case before. It's not a conscious thing, but it's there.
On a test with multiple items, this contamination does happens and is an actual part.
One of my test (that I keep offline) even goes as far as using look alike items with a small chance to prime and prompt for a wrong answer (yes, that is a bit sadistic, but it weed of people who are relying too much on their memory and unable to exert impulse control).
Here is an example of such test: http://www.iquizz.be/question.php
50% of people get the very first question wrong because they miss one parameter and rely to much on their perception. It's one of the easiest item, but it requires one to control his impulse and look at each proposition. Which is (as I can see) seldom done.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@untonsured Neither ^^ I trial the tests online on individual I don't even know. For the offline test, I am also accepting people, but they can only donit once. I would say that I lean on IRT because items are progressive and skewed in a way to be really harder and harder. So, everyone should be able to solve the first item (in fact, 9 of the 10) and very few people should be able to solve the last one. So, the offline test produces a skewed belle curve (like a poisson distribution if not mistaken). That allows to pick 10 items and have a rough estimate.
Also, the offline test is just not raw score to IQ, but also how well you manage depending on level of abstraction, number of parameters, wether it's "local" or not, if some data is incomplete or not, if you stick to previous reasoning, are influenced by the item presentation, or can work with different kind of exercises. Still trying to norm it, but it's quite hard. I don't have the money to hire an agency, so I have to meet people one to one. Also, finding people is hard, because they have to be interested and sit for 2h in the worse case. (was 4, but after 2h, if you are halfway, you're drained. So there is no point to finish the test.)
Amd when I was proctoring as a volunteer, I didn't do the analysis; I was psychotechnician. Which means I can handle the material, but can't evalute.
For my own tests, though, I can. That's also why I avoid giving an IQ figure and stick to a ball park appreciation.
In the end, I would like that my offline test is properly normed and I would give it for free. But there is the danger that people memorize it. Which means I would have to limit its distribution somehow! Pretty sure there would be psychologists interrested in a free tool.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have been asked if I was some kind of scientist. Sometimes people can go far to not label you "intelligent" :-D
And some will go impersonal: "Damn, that was smart!".
The thing is that most of the time, people react like you are fishy and saying non-sense. Some even become aggressive because they think you downplay them.
That took some time to sink in and understand the true value of communication. When I was a teenager, I was like "hell, fuck off if you can't even use the proper words". Then I matured, learned about Jacobson and how I was ignorant those times. it takes much more than one could imagine to make the journey from "Accuracy" to "Expressiveness". From "Being absolutely correct/pedantic" to "Being absolutely understood/pragmatic".
Now, long term friends and colleagues have been used to it and did pick it up. But it took time!
To give you a real life example, during a team building we had to solve puzzles and do geocaching. Two things I am good at. Puzzles are often recycled and similar, which helps.
From the beginning, I told the team "You are lucky, I am very good with these". Sanction was immediate, they put me aside! For one of the puzzles, I had the opportunity to look at it, then left the group to relieve myself. While doing so, I had a clear path to the solution. I came back and asked where is the recorder (that I saw at the beginning) and that there should be music about car brands and the order in which they appear would gave us the lock code. From there, they gave me the last 3 puzzles to solve and we finished penultimate.
One of the puzzles was unsolved, only our team got it. I sent a company wide email to detail the solution.
People are not that easy! Also, intelligence is always the last explanation; You have "-Sheer luck", "-That's not the first time you did it", "-Yeah, in fact that was simple" before it!
Lastly, one mistake annihilate every bright moments.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nnnik3595 It's not the end of the world ^^ But it is when you go to a practice interview 😂
In one company, I interviewed a guy in short, tongs, and vaping. The manager had already eliminated him, just by the look.
As I use a protocol and don't mind the attire (except in training), I processed the guy. He did apply for a PHP role and flunked all the technical parts. He didn't know PHP 😂
So, I told him to use pseudo-code. He did pass the test (except the PHP part, of course) with flying colors. So, he was a hire. In 2 or 3 weeks, he learned enough PHP to be number 1 in the team. After six months, he wanted to go somewhere else because he did learn nothing new and wasn't challenged.
I was also the QAM in that company and reviewed his production, which quickly became damn good 😂
He did stay because I told him it would be challenging to have someone like me, who takes the time to teach, in another company. Also, because he was a high performer, I didn't mind that he did some toy projects on the side between tasks.
I caught him once; he was afraid, and I told him that I didn't care about that. All I care about is work being accomplished correctly and it's done.
Way to keep your devs happy ^^
The manager also forced hire (i.e., ignored the interview results), and that guy was nice but did terrible work and didn't learn. The perpetual junior ^^
It's why I always use protocols and not guts.
So, a free fly would have been a side note that would have been discarded unless there were real damaging things like lying or a bad attitude (which I tested partially).
I was way harsher in mock interviews because interviewers tend to be superficial. My goal was not to prepare people for interviews that focus on their ability to do the work but their ability to answer stupid questions well.
For example, while analogies are great, they are dangerous if the interviewer doesn't understand them.
Another pitfall is speaking of people—especially individuals as imponderables.
Another one is not being able to give practical examples that the layman can understand.
A bad example is: «I used dichotomic search to identify records based on a time range, knowing that the unique id is monotonically increasing.»
That's a pretty reasonable explanation, but it sounds like bullshit and misses the fact that it was done because the sole index was on the unique ID.
So, you have to make it a story:
«We had a table with only one index on the primary key. I noticed that as the id increased, the time was increasing too. So, I used a basic algorithm called dichotomic search. (ask if the interviewer knows and explain)
That way, I could identify the first and last id of the rows to delete efficiently because it takes log(n) to find a row—a maximum of 20 queries for a million rows. Without that, the query to find the rows would have required a full table scan. We are looking at hours for one query.»
Much less brief, but now you've:
- The problem
- The solution
- Why the solution does better
- How good is the solution
So, instead of hearing some bullshit, the interviewer saw that you understood the problem and found an adequate solution with a proper estimate of its efficiency.
When I did the interview and heard "BS," I would ask the candidate to expand a bit. Saving them from themselves 😂
And my usual note: your typical recruiter processes 10 to 20 people daily. So they have to find shortcuts. That's ugly and primarily unfair for everyone involved, but they have no choice.
I was lucky to do recruitment while I was working at different places and dedicate a full hour (sometimes more) to candidates.
I also have training in psycho-technics, which helps. And the technical background too. I think even ASD helps 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
One thing is that you can "lock" someone sentiments toward you and the way they think about whatever you are going to tell them by involuntarily priming them.
"Hitler did a good job" was a something I said in a snack and patrons overheard it.
I quickly realized I did a major fuck up, I didn't pay attention on how people could interpret it.
It was not a supporting statement, it was a factual observation. His engineers did a lot of work to make the process efficient up to the point they recycled their hairs!
It is "process 101" down to the hardware and with psychological aspects.
Of course, what he did is to be condemned and is intolerable. Of course I could not agree with anything. Though, I said it was "good.”
I was saved by the bartender who had to yell that I was not meaning that. Yup, people didn't listen at all when I tried to explain (also, I was fearing for myself as everyone wanted my skin at that point!)
The thing is that we can show "disconnect" and appear to be "cold" and "utilitarian" when we go full analytical. We put emotions aside and just look with an objective lens. It can appear cold and inappropriate. That's why it's hard to have discussion without having a preamble (framing the whole discussion), which I failed to do at that time.
In a non-intuitive way, it can even slow us down. I was doing a working memory exercise and the proctor asked me how I want to continue with the challenge. She gave me the options and instead of going with my guts, I took 5 minutes browsing the options and "trying them out" to see which would be the most accessible to me then asked her some confirmation questions. Other people just have an answer popping and it takes them few seconds (they go with their "gut") :-p
On top of that, when I have an intense reflection, I "freeze.” Sometimes people see that and ask "There is something you did not understand" and I have to say: "no, just thinking.”
It is quite important to recognize we have all our quirks!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
4:20 More importantly, you get exposed to various algorithms you wouldn't explore yourself and the teachers knows very well how to throw in the pool to maximize your learning.
And that's indeed 3 to 4 years instead of 6 months. So, that's highly cumulative. Even 6 months in those setting would give you a huge boost.
As an example, in the first weeks of algorithmic, when we saw control structures, we also saw how a rupture is constructed. And that is something that you've to write from time to time. There is zero thoughts going in that, because you recognize from the get go that you will need that construct and you are used to it. Same with graph traversal (graph, trees, state machines, petri networks, markov ...) or relational algebra.
You're also told how to structure your requirements and your analyses.
Another truth is that most of the jobs are very accessible, because they are basically Extract Transform Load (where "load" is also "display").
In the end, the best is a blend. Learn a bit by yourself, do CS then continue to learn by yourself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Shit, Tim, I am using Pools in my software. Hope it doesn't offense you that I use "Pool" :-D
I am also using bad words like Kill, killChild, terminateParent, startDaemon, removeChild, ruleViolation... Ouch!
Replacement, devitalize, requestParentToStop, startBackgroundNonAttachedProcess, freeChild, ruleNotFollowed. Much more bearable !
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Long term problems do not need long term solution. That's a fallacy I know well enough!
I have restructured people and the story is always the same: "Oh, her ? Don't bother, she was always like that. Now it's too late for her to change.". Then a year later: "What did happen ? She is so compliant!".
Then of course, it's not easy to do. Hence, it takes people with proper training! It's also a dirty job people find amusing the first time then they are unable to push enough. Because yes, change requires you to destabilize people and resist giving an hand. On top of that, you look as an a*hole through most of it.
The point was that short term solutions exists for a variety of problems and time-frames.
It's different from a lasting solution vs a temporary relief. Again, a short term solutions can offer a lasting solution. And yes, often the short term solution is not the best; still it can be a stepping stone. An enabler for a better solution.
As an example, proper education is a long term solution. Short term solution is to create ad hoc schools. Not the best conditions, but it gets the cogs turning. Then it can be enhanced.
Asking to go straight to the final solution is stupid...unless you have some gains doing so. (may be that you can sacrifice a generation and accomplish the feat in a tenth of the time as a result)
It's why it's dangerous to take shortcuts, life is complex!
1
-
1
-
1
-
To be honest, people can't read sentences containing "some", "may", "could", "many", "few". They just skip these words and it totally change a discourse.
When writing, you have to use inserts like they did in their first paragraph. People will either skip it entirely or read it fully.
That's also means it had becoming harder than ever to convey nuances. That's why a lot of words gets redefined and context is not accounted anymore.
It's not about vocabulary, it's about nuances.
As an example, "fucking" is often used as a punctuation or accent. Like in "it's fucking good". You have an axis where you can say "quite","very","unexpectedly"...and then you have a perpendicular axis which is the tone. The use of "fucking" can translate some excitement and/or surprise in a colorful way.
That is the thing: colors!
Before that, it was not "ok" to say such words in the presence of less than 8 year old kids because they are not totally developed and can't understand it fully. Now, it's problematic with adults for the very same reasons! Coincidentally, that's also the level of writing in your regular tabloid! (which is a good thing: write for the audience, not for yourself!)
1
-
Except in studies that shows that women are automatically over evaluated because they are seen as more important for the survival of the species. (Hence sentences like "Women and children first")
When normalizing salaries (earning per hour worked for the same activity), then women earn way more.
Also, men working in care-tacking have difficulties that women don't have, mainly that people have more trust in women.
Even in recruiting it's an issue to be a men. I was instructed to not interview women alone, because it was a risk for the company.
Now, when using days and conflating all occupation the gap reverse. Indeed, women usually don't do 50h weeks and don't do jobs that destroy their body like varying heavy load, plumbing, working in furnaces, masonry, collecting garages, security/bouncer, car mechanics ...
We should really value those jobs more, because people are literally destroying their own body for us.
A good solution would be to force everyone to assume two roles, one in social work and one in physically damaging activities. The week could also be decreased to a 8h per day week, but for everyone! That would certainly make things more equal.
Then yearly, each individual would be evaluated on his productivity and would have to work prorata to catch up.
That way, the fast workers are not disadvantaged. Otherwise, it's slavery and we don't want it.
1
-
@darkushippotoxotai9536 For taxes, what is done in Belgium is almost good.
If you are too poor, you shouldn't be taxed. For everyone else, you remove the "poverty threshold" and tax the remaining at 20%.
If you're super rich, you still pay your 20%.
In fact, with that system, the rich would pay something like 20.01% so they wouldn't even bat an eye at this. The really poor would pay 0%.
In Belgium, that's not that idea, because we have "steps" so the base %age increase up to 50%. Then we have 21% tax on spending and 24% for solidarity help.
In my case, my base tax is 30% to which you add the 245% (so rounded to 50%) then the 21% on anything you buy. Overall, it's 71%. A bit less since a part of my salary is removed before applying those taxes, but still a lot and considered socialist for Americans (because IT IS).
Still do better than France as rich comes here ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
They don't ask if you cheated, they simply say you did OR that you will not be working properly with the group due to the big difference.
I once went for psycho-technical tests (not IQ) and it happens that IQ can give you a big edge on such tests.
So, I did breeze through the questions then had to wait.
They took my papers first and called me to their office were they asked how I knew the answers and that IF I really did answer all that without cheating, then the training wasn't suitable for me because I was out of range; Would learn too fast and be annoyed. That was a risk they didn't want to take as some people becomes themselves annoyances.
There was no recourse.
Then decided I should fake it, but frankly abhor it. So, I ended up crying in another place and explaining how stupid it was because I could train myself, but it was not enough for companies as they want you to follow a training. Training I couldn't follow, because I wasn't in the range. So, they accepted me and I became "assistant".
These kind of problems can really happen to gifted people, but it's far from what he depict: no interrogation, pure dismissal 😁
1
-
They are stopping services, not to punish people, but have people realize that their government is not that powerful and combat propaganda before it becomes serious. It took me more time that I would admit to understand that, because medias do a very bad job of explaining that...
Before understanding that, I was thinking "WTF, they are punishing people who did nothing.".
The second fold is that those companies enrich Russia, which is not good either.
If people have a normal life, Russia government can send the message that USA/EU is evil, that they have right on Ukraine and doing the right thing. They can keep people ignorant and better manipulate them.
Now, the better things would have been to use networks to deliver real information, forcing the government to shut down services themselves. That would have been a greater impact, but greed of those companies probably spoke very loudly.
War is usually harsh for civilians on both sides.
1
-
With digital timers, you don't see the whole day schedule! So, it's a tradeoff.
15 years ago, a school where I was a student called me, because they couldn't figure out how to change the schedule of the boiler.
It was for good reason, that was an old system with a mixture of mechanical timers and one digital timer where the screen was so small that it didn't offers display of days, but 3 digit codes. So, you had to use a flow chart from the manual and fiddle with the mechanical timer too.
Took me a solid hour at the time to understand how to setup different schedules for different days, because it wasn't as simple as entering the schedule day by day. You had to think about how time would pass by encoding start and stop times for other timers. A big shit to program, especially when you think that you are dealing with time of the day and it's in fact hours to wait 😂
System got changed after that.
I still have the one with push tabs in my room to manage ventilation. Because it's mechanical and so simple, I did setup it once and I'll probably die before having to replace it. Obviously, those are not to be fiddled with every day (Because tabs becomes loose).
Ironically, I did electro-mecanical studies and I didn't though out how the override switch did work. The most basic mechanical "or" hold switch, but that's often those things that you forgot about. A bit like the "not" one ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You equate right wing with religion, it's not always the case. It's like equating left-wing with the inability to define "woman"...
It's true, though, that the left wing abandoned Judaic values AND sciences by claiming that sex is gender construct, then moving the goalpost claiming sex and gender are different things then even having kids transitioning.
We are living in a very rough politic time where both sides are getting crazy and in the end, people may end up voting for one extreme as a reactance mechanism.
In Belgium, the national vote was ignored twice and that's why we ended up without government for years. The left won and since, we are in a spiraling downfall. Belgium cater for everyone before Belgians... The extreme right use a simple trick: "We will cater for you first". So, people voted massively right, not allowing left parties to regroup. So, they rejected the vote!
In the democracy index, we are labelled as "Flawed democracy". We do the rituals, but they are just a gimmick!
Another things is that I followed christian education, because that was what was necessary to have a good education. The material covered in those school goes way deeper than the public schools... christian school always win over state school. But yes, then you need to read the Bible and listen to dumb things...
Some people even ended up schooling at home because they don't see the plus value of normal education if few hours per day does a better job.
One solution to those issues is to improve public school. Smaller classes, better prepared teachers who don't give their opinions. Cover less material (No need to learn calculus), but going more in-depths (real mastery of our positional system, understanding of ratios inside out).
If you think I am being crazy, try to solve this in your head: "When I remove a third of a number, I get 8, what is my initial number ?".
Lack of understanding of ration leads to posing an equation like : "x-(1/3)x=8".
When understanding ratio, one know that 8 is then two third, hence 12 is the sought number.
Most adults can't work with ratios, even when they just completed their degree... Yet, they can integrate and differentiate. Guess what is the most useful.
Education is really flawed and it opens the door to those sects and ideologies.
1
-
1
-
Years ago, I laughed because people were impressed that I solved a problem that stumped them for weeks. They had a table in a database that had no indexes. They wanted to delete rows for a year, but the database was struggling when they issued a "delete between" because there was no index. (To have a fair idea, there were multiple rows inserted per second over a few years)
They tried some things, like copying the data, filtering out the undesired rows, indexing the table..., but nothing worked.
At some point, I was aware of an issue with a "database migration." So, I went to see the network engineers (yup, no DBA), and they explained. After the explanation, I told them it would take a few minutes to write some code, allowing a fast deletion. Indeed, in 5 minutes, we did the cleanup.
So, they were stumped that it was so easy for me. They asked me how I could think that fast of a solution that is so particular. So, I laughed and told myself that this problem, solved by dichotomic search, was taught during the first month of computer science. That's straight from the book.
Experience is something you can earn in many ways, including your degree.
And I have seen many people with a master's degree who have zero experience because they never really learned. They learned to pass the exam, write their paper, and discard the knowledge.
You ask them to validate JSON, and they think about regexp, confuse themselves, and fail. Yet they had whole chapters on finite state automata.
1
-
1
-
@williamlau2405 I bought an apartment with a fixed rate loan, so it had the effect to "freeze" my rent. That I own the apartment is just bonus for me!
If I did stay in the previous apartment, I would have paid 250€ extra per month, or 3000 per year. As I couldn't, I would have to move on a much smaller apartment since moving is not free either.
So, had no real choice there!
Now, we have a huge inflation of rent, but I still pay the very same amount. Comparatively, I am now paying my apartment for a cheap price as my salary also increased AND on the market, the amount I pay would be for an apartment of half the size.
I am also free to do whatever I want, I can renovate the shower, change the wall paint etc.
Huge costs will arise when I'll have to fix equipment, electricity or install new windows, but at that time, I will have enough money for that.
And when I will retire, I will enjoy zero rent! It also lower my taxes while I am paying back the bank. And when I'll be retired, it will not really impact the tax.
The worse being owning and working, but I should be able to avoid that.
1
-
1
-
@louisrobitaille5810 You should consult though, that advice still hold. It's not bad to see a psychiatrist and neurologist. Those can really pinpoint the issue if there is one besides "no luck, missing some mirror neurons".
If you are generally appreciated by people, that's even more vital to consult.
At worse, you'll lose a bit of money, at best, you may find out that it can be fixed!
As an example, I was diagnosed with autism early on, when it wasn't really well known. In parallel, I was lucky to be gifted. That means I was able to compensate and be functioning. Though, when I entered the workforce and started to forcibly meet people, I encountered many novel situations in which I didn't any set of rules to follow. So, back to cell 1 and I acted "funny" and was also puzzled by people. Then I consulted a psychologist who evaluated me and told me that I just have to be patient as I internalized some behaviors (behaviors I exhibited without being able to explain besides "it's what is expected, right ?" and that I didn't do purposely)
No medicine, nothing. So, you shouldn't be afraid.
And even a diagnostic that sounds bad is not necessarily bad. As an example "psychopath" looks really bad, but there are good psychopath.
The worse is just ignoring it and moving forward, it can develop in more troubling stuff that could be prevented by acting on it. As an example, I know that I am a bit paranoid, so my first response to any situation is seeking intent (and that mechanism also helps me to understand people), problem is that I have a bias for "bad intent". Because I know that, I can act on it and give a second thought to counter it. Left unchecked, I would resent everyone for no apparent reasons and turn crazy.
Flip side: I became much more critical and objective.
Really, would be good to consult.
I wish you good luck!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
2:07 All those stock graphs are misleading, because they don't show the zero. Worse, two graphs can look the same AND have a different offset, making them very different.
In this graph, most people will see a huge decline, while in reality it's a 3USD drop. But it looks like zeroing. If the zero were present, it would just look like normal noise.
There are article justifying it by saying "it's done to make a point" (it's a way to say "to not be neutral" or "fit data representation to a narrative". Or even better, they justify by saying "if it is the norm, like in stock charts". That can't be invented 🤣
The best is to show the two views, because it makes it easier for people to understand that:
- Overall, it's not that consequential
- Recent event DID influence negatively the stock price
Those two bullets seems to contradict each other, so here is an explainer: The value decreased due to recent events and it may be a trend, looking at an higher scale though, the effect is limited and even less than the noise (people passing order and influencing themselves the stock price, regardless of any event).
So, that tells us that what is happening with Elon definitely skew the share price, but not sufficiently to be alarmist. Yet, it can worsen.
Good thing to do:
Go in Google, search the stock and look at it on different periods, consider the %age difference instead of absolute values, try to plot the graph with the y axis starting at zero.
Ask yourself that question: is it stable or chaotic? If stable, does it show a trend ? If chaotic, does tacking a larger period into account make it more constant ? Is considering the graph with a y axis starting at zero make it less noisy ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Years ago, I was Rick, except my prediction was correct.
I worked in a company that was misusing technology. The owner was very abusive to employees. So, I told him I would quit if the behavior continued. I saw one employee cry and discuss with her during lunch outside.
The owner thought he was a great architect and looked down on everyone for not understanding. When I told him it was weak and bristle, he replied that I didn't know enough.
He hired two guys to work on a project; those two guys used Scala. I warned about that because we don't do Scala. I ended up doing Scala.
We were still using an unfit technology and best of all, I worked for that provider, creating test cases and fixes for them. Still, even with my fixes, that wasn't the right technology.
The owner became more abusive, so I warned him that his company would be done in a few months if I were to quit.
Then I quit. A few months later, I received a letter from the state asking if I was paid fully and, if not, if I could claim money from the dissolution. The company was gone.
Another employee sent me a message on LinkedIn to apologize for being tough on me. I didn't even realize it, but the owner asked him to ask me difficult questions to prove I was dumb. What did happen was that I didn't catch that because I answered those trivially.
When I received the mail, I was first panicked because receiving letters from the state regarding companies and employment is usually very, very bad. But past the first lines, I was smiling ear to ear.
There is nothing worse than a colleague crying because of work.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AltumNovo Hardest part in making an item is not finding a good "logic". It's to not have confound.
When it's well designed, the answer is unique because one can eliminates all other possibilities as being more complex.
It touch to another subject that is information theory.
As an example, you will easily concede that: "1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1" is a simpler sequence than "1,2,3,4,5,6,7". Though, they are very close in simplicity. You may even not see the gap and says they are both equally simple.
Compared to "2,4,8,16,32,64", they are really simpler.
Now, what about: "1,2,3,4,1,2,4,3,2,1,4,3,2,4,1,3,2,4,3,1". Yes, much more complex than all the previous series.
To evaluate the complexity you use an heuristic that is: "How hard it is to describe it ?" and it means: "What is the minimal amount of information I need to describe it ?".
The first one is "repeat 1". The second is "add 1", the next is "consecutive power of two" (which requires an abstraction: "power of").
The last one is very verbose:
"each group of 4 numbers represent a step. The rightmost number goes left and every other times, the leftmost number goes right. When a number has reached the other end, the left/right-most begins its journey". Even with that, it will still be though for some people to get it.
And so, if faced with a numeric sequence question you have doubt about two possible solutions, measure the quantity of information required and pick the easiest. It's very possible that you are not seeing an easier pattern too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@AltumNovo What a poor understanding of mathematics!
Mathematics is not arithmetic, geometry, algebra, calculus, topology, percolation ...
Problem solving requires one to analyze the situation properly, identify the steps and the tools he need, get/create tools, apply his solution.
That's what math teaches in a controlled environment.
Now, you had a poor education or you did follow it poorly. A good teacher don't show how to solve a problem, he put you on track when you stray away too much by giving your the proper hint. Happens that the byproduct of practicing problem solving using mathematics as an excuse is to learn some mathematical concepts in the process. But that's still a byproduct.
Now, I'll end the discussion here as you are basically asking me to provide what you can't and just babel assertions without foundations. Even asking studies you refute because they are studies made by people that have to appear to have an high IQ, so it's a circular argument.
I was answering to you for other potential readers who may fall for your boldness.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/research-confirms-a-link-between-intelligence-and-life-expectancy/
https://www.businessinsider.com/facts-you-dont-want-to-know-iq-2011-11?r=US&IR=T#breastfeeding-can-increase-a-childs-iq-by-three-to-eight-points-4
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I started fixed a gamin console while taking a dump, only went to my desk for the soldering 😂
Most of my friends wouldn't even be at ease at a station that is clean and orderly ^^
And if the space is too confined, they wouldn't be able to handle the iron.
They would probably kill ICs by heating them too much and they wouldn't even have a fair idea how to check empiricly.
They would jolt fhemselves if there is a battery, because they wouldn't even think to disconnect it and wait. They wouldn't even know where they can create a short to drain the circuit. If a discreet component comes in a different packaging, they would be puzzled.
That's all those things that has to be overcome.
In some parts, it's like cooking ^^
You've to do it. It's how you learn.
And when you open a device without schematics/docs, you've to be observant. Even if some PCBs have markings that greatly help.
In the chinese console I fixed, it was a blank plate, but some german devices have the name of each component and the outline.
This should be mandatory in school to do a few circuits. Not even learning ohm laws. Just looking at it from far away, swapping parts.
We have kids playing with arduino and they do great things. They don't know about the formula. But they know how to read schematics, reproduce a board. And when they get used to it, they try stuff ^^
Those kids will certainly not fear to open any device to have a look, know how to look for broken components and swap them.
Months ago, we had to change a car battery. It's simple, you just unscrew it, swap and screw the new one. Everyone was frightened, because they didn't knew the basic about electricity. And everyone did already got a good jolt from a bad transformer ^^
So, I had to show it was OK to touch the battery with a metal tool. That was OK to grab the wires etc.
What was not ok is closing the circuit. I ended up doing it myself, the fear was too strong for them ^^
Hooking the battery to a charger was too much.
They already used chargers for small batteries, never was frightening to them. But the fact it was a car battery, that the charger is big, with big wires, that was enough to scare them.
Sounds stupid, but that's how people who are not in ease with electricity behave.
I have a friend who is afraidnof manipulating an iron. Because it's very hot and he doesn't has sturdy hands.
He can do what I do, yet he can't.
There are even people afraid to build computers ^^
I remember, when we had to do automatons (S300), the teacher told us to out a processor, memory bank, some input and output.
I read the manual which explained how the clip worked and in 5 minutes, I had a setup being mirrored on the computer.
I had student asking me how to put the modules and how I knew where they did go. I didn't, because there was no such things. You just put the modules where they can fit and the automaton will configure itself. It's magic.
As for connecting to the PC, not many choices. So, you can't go wrong.
I think it was a full lesson just for that, because people had to be "broken".
It was seen as hard, because all projects were done using official manuals from Siemens.
Mostly overcoming your fears.
And the we had DAC. Where you've to come with your own PCBs. Much harder of course, but most students were at ease, so it looked easier.
A lot of it is getting used to.
I do programming and I am good (top percentile) in Java, Kotlin, XQuery, XSLT, SQL, JavaScript, .Net (even have champion title for that one) and PHP.
I picked up PureBasic and created a graphic editor as a toy project...
People think it's fake, then see I know those and wonder how. Simple: I try stuff ^^
And because I practiced that a lot, learning new technologies is much simpler!
There is no way around some sort of practice. No way around.
1
-
@1caramarie Well, no. As you are a psychologist, I can shorten my comment: primitive thinking. Life is a lottery, nothing more, nothing less. You can refuse a good hand, but can't create one. Those who create opportunities in an effective way are crooks. Hard word and dedication can get you far...unless you have bad luck. Now, if one abandon at the first failure, he is surely doomed to fail. The other way is not true. One can be dedicated and hard working and never get somewhere. Those are extremes and they exists. Hiding these extremes and making people 100% responsible of their fate is one of the best ways to deconstruct an individual. We wonder why so much people are broken ? This is one of the reasons. Lastly, even if I use simple words, my writing can be tough to digest. Read carefully. I never spoke about predestination (this to prevent a classical bias of association).
Let pick an example: me. I am born with autistic troubles, until age 3 I did not speak a word. My language unfolded within weeks with advanced vocabulary. Still, got interned my first 18 years in various institutions. That means that I was raised by the state in all the luxury one can imagine. BUT, I got lucky, happens I am gifted. I may have troubles to know kiss or shake hand, but I can solve very abstract problems like the ones in WAIS3R, Cattell and Raven tests. I can also write software and comprehend the abstraction within days if they are very complex, unless they are obfuscated due to my mental model. (I have a strong codification ability which is defeated when entropy is too high)
So, I naturally did sciences, learned quantum cryptography, got a bronze medal in an international scientific event. Create computer languages "just for fun", games and helping children learn computing. I even won a prize to a contest in a subject I touched a bit like 10 years ago. People say "congrats", it's like saying "you are 170cm, congrats". But when things goes smoothly with people, I am happy because all the learning and mimics got me through (this is where is my "hard work and dedication").
Can I do a phd ? Looking for a master for almost 3 years in a row and unable to pick it up for health reasons. Wanting to go abroad now that I have spare money, I can't!
See, I can just wait to be better. Dedication and hard work will not help me. Same for the beginning of my life, external causes gave me a rough start.
As you are an attorney, you may appreciate one of my feats: overruling one of your peers, so much that he tried to get me out of the trials. I am not an attorney and at that time I was living without any mean to heat myself and in an insalubre habitation, I had to go to public bathroom and it was hard to rest. Got to read all the required laws, consolidate them and challenge the other party. Oh, and in the process, I dismissed my free attorney as he was drowning the trial. Almost anyone else would have lost the trial, unless he is a specialized attorney. The cherry one the cake ? I had the luxury to tell the other party how incompetent he was because he tried to "twist" the reality and misquoted the law. Judge did not even budge. And the finale ? I did not even go to the conclusion. I knew that my binder would do a great job. It did. (No sane attorney would do that...I am not an attorney)
So, total BS. We can steer our development. We can't override it. In my slice of life, you should realize that I could go over because I was luckily well equipped. There is stupid people out there and it's not their fault. They can't become intelligent. That's destructive to bribe them.
1
-
@1caramarie I warned you it would be a challenging read. You did not understood my writings, at least what you quoted.
"I can just wait to be better. Dedication and hard work will not help me."
I was speaking of health issues. The only remedy is TIME. This is one of the many example of when you can just WAIT and not screw yourself. (i.e. don't do white night when it takes you 2 weeks to recover one hour of missed sleep)
As for the beginning of my life, I wasn't free to do anything and creativity was punished. I had not control on adults and rules that were set.
So, I'll reiterate my point in short form:
In life, you only have a limited responsibility in you SUCCESS. As you wrote yourself, you gave a hand to your daughter. What if you did not ?
During my first 18 years, I wasn't free to learn as I would have wanted. I even got 3 of my self written Mathematics Almanach because I spent too many time on these.
What you are seeing is people being successful around you and you being successful. And it's very hard form someone to accept external causes when things go well and internal causes when thing goes bad. In fact, it's one of the strongest biases with reactance and confirmation one. You seems to fall for two of them.
To give you and idea of roughness, I won a Rotary Club price for the best evolution in life, I was ex aequo with someone who lost his parent and one of his legs and got over it quickly. I had NO way to interfere. Luckily, I am resilient as I was able to quickly rationalize the world and even did it excessively as a defense mechanism.
I am not doing the "pity party", just correcting a strong bias in today society where poor are poor because of them, people ugly because of them etc. That's all wrong and promote selfishness. I spend 6% of my time to care about children wanting to learn IT stuff...when I am not sharing open source projects.
I could say to a child "common, make same effort, you are whining and making no effort to go over". Instead, I try to understand. Hard to develop a game when one has spatial problems, unless you can go around and show the vectors behind. Or even simpler, when a child do not understand "2-3" because it makes no sense and you tell him "it goes the other way around, so we put `-` in front". Handling children make your point of view totally flip, because
The attitude of "everyone own his destiny" is BS for selfish and egocentric people to feel good. It's also very rewarding to be able to say: "I did it alone, all by myself".
As for intelligence, this is something like weight and height. One is not responsible for that, only for decreasing it (bad hygiene of life). Neither I find it logical to congratulate a smart one because he did something...smart. To give you an example, it's like congratulating you because you wrote a comment on Youtube. It's just less relatable, so, harder to comprehend. Oh, congratulation, you can ride the roller-coaster because of your size:-D See how funny it can be ?
And I'll stop on that because, by experience, I know that it's almost impossible to deconstruct these biases without rehearsing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
The only things I find fair we have to pay collectively is maternal leave and hygienic products.
Those are things that are specific to being a woman.
Being unsafe on the street is a cross gender issue. Education can solve that very well.
I routinely walked one stop to accompany a women who felt unsafe, although I could just ignore her and hop on the metro.
During this walk, we talk and she feel safer.
I remember old "adverts" which explained girls how to use other people at their advantage, it should be done again.
In a strange way, when a guy is in a weird situation, he seeks reinforcement. When a girl is in a weird situation, she isolate herself.
Probably comes from the fear instilled by media "all men bad!". Except it's not the case...
People are more and more isolated too and fear to talk to each other and it takes more effort for men to realize something is weird.
Also, men themselves can fear things goes bad, but usually, when you walk in a situation, the guy assaulting the girl will fly.
Even had the case where I talked over metro track and even if the guy knew I couldn't cross easily (would have to walk one stair up, checkout, check in then come down the other stair), it was enough to ask the girl how she is to deter him.
They are weak predators and can only target people they think are weak.
Think is that you don't need to confront the aggressor. Just to engage with the victime and walk away together and if it becomes too much, walk in the closest business. (and girls can do that too)
It's also important to not adresse the perpetrator and just walk firmly toward the victime. It confuse them because it indicates you've some link with the victime, not that you're playing the hero. It's very important, because confronting the aggressor verbally will just motivate him. And if you've to, you've to be very short, like "hey" very loudly, but it's very difficult to convey a good enough threat, so it's risky. If you approach correctly, 99% of the job is done.
I also had to walk myself in a business due to an assault where I saved my life and ran straight in a business, explaining what was happening. One should not fear to say it. It's not being weak, it's being smart!
All the rest is pure BS.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Both eye and brain! You need low persistance and high processing speed and on top of that, not ignoring input. The brain is good to automatically filter out non essential parts to better focus on what is more interesting, mostly, what's new in your environment.
It's why things in the peripheral vision tend to fade out. And if the thing you're looking at is quite diffuse, it would vanish too! The brain will simply register that it's always there and not care anymore, hence the vanishing.
But the brain does even better, when we look things in the morning, at noon and in the afternoon, we are blind to color changes. The brain takes the environmental cue to correct colors! Yup, "white balance" ^^
And things can get weird, if you lookup "McCollough effect", you'll see gratings which can change your color perception for minutes, up to months! (So, dangerous for artists ^^)
Vision is really a weird thing!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"That's my opinion": Thank you, you will be terminated.
Teachers CAN'T give their opinions. This is that way because teachers can impression kids. Teachers are authority figures. And the younger the pupils are, the graver it is.
You've hours of training to learn how to manage that part, even if you teach maths. Because students are curious and will inevitably ask you what you think about various subjects.
As you can't answer, you have to give an answer that broadens the student's view but does not permit the student to know where you stand.
The USA probably has that same policy, hence the back peddling of the teacher, "But that's not my opinion. It's their policy".
Teachers are not robots, so it's acceptable to have some slip-ups. But a slip-up is not putting down a student or actively promoting your ideals. A slip like inadvertently telling, "Let's share equally since it is how it should be."
And the training goes further. One of my peers wanted to be a bit poetic, so he said, "... and nature created ..." and was halted on the spot by our teacher. You can't even say that because it introduces mysticism by personificating nature.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1