I promise you I mean this sincerely, and not in a memey internet insult kind of way - are you perhaps autistic?
I ask because this is exactly the type of comment one of my siblings would make, and she is on the spectrum. She wouldn't be able to understand the social dynamics at play here, whereas for other folks it's just common sense. "Optional" is not really optional in some social settings, and that's something autistic folks struggle with being aware of, much less understanding. The activity may be optional in the most pedantic sense; you won't be struck down by lightning if you decide not to participate. But there will be consequences.
All of which is another reason why this whole exercise is an awful idea, considering that the number of autistic folks in software engineering is probably a bit higher than the population baseline.
No, this is incorrect. This has not been the case for 60 years now. These tests were discontinued as part of the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1964. That information is in the linked article, which is short and only takes a minute to read.
This example was also far from universal, certainly across the entire USA but even in Louisiana.
edit: reading other comments, it isn't clear whether this information is even true for a small subset of Louisiana 60+ years ago
I'd personally move the date forward quite a bit. There are some fairly basic freedoms that were lacking up until recently.
Spousal rape started to be criminalized in the 1970s, but it took until 1993 for it to be criminalized in every state (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape_in_the_United_Sta...). Oklahoma and South Carolina were the two holdouts. It's still treated differently under the law in many states.
There are still some significant gaps in federal protection. Gender identity and sexual orientation are protected in the workplace and for housing, but not elsewhere.
The South was historically dependent on slavery and rebelled against the freedoms that the North always provided. The North won the war and only after that is there a country in the South to look down on. But the North, and the birth of the nation, was always about freedom. It just took a long time to get the South to come along.
Most of Europe never had the level of formal, legal racism of the US. But it is worth remembering which European countries were dictatorships at around the same time (Spain, Portugal, Greece) and that Eastern Europe came to democracy even more recently.
I'm sure plenty of professors use CUDA in their courses because it's what they actually use. At the same time, in 2013 when I was in college I took a course on "parallel computing" as a CS elective. The professor told us on day 1 that NVidia was sponsoring the course and had donated a bunch of GPUs to the clusters we could remotely connect into for the sake of the class. Naturally we used CUDA exclusively.
I know for a fact that this happened at a lot of schools. I don't know if it's still happening since I'm not in that world anymore, but don't see why it would have stopped.
CUDA is extremely simple, the classes might as well be on rails. OpenCL is like impossible without graphics and/or CUDA/distributed computing/operating system experience.
I'm not sure if I really agree - the level of abstraction used for each is extremely similar. There's not really any "Graphics Pipeline Specifics" pollution in OpenCL or CUDA.
In a vacuum that's certainly the most pragmatic way to look at it. The problem is that tolerance of abuse tends to create more abuse, to the point that usually it's not a sustainable policy.
It's not tolerance of abuse. Abuse when detected will be punished. The important thing is, stopping ALL abuse preemptively causes more pain than it's worth.
If you did, think back on all the kids that were your classmates. Not just the ones in the honors and AP courses you probably took, but all of them. Do you really find it surprising that they didn't learn or retain various bits of seemingly simple information?
If you went to some kind of magnet school with only the smart kids, take my word for it - a huge percentage of 14-17 year olds have absolutely no interest in learning and remembering what inflation is and how it works. Some of them will find some internal curiosity later in life, but plenty will never change much.
This is a minor pet peeve of mine developed from too much time spent reading internet comments years ago where young people would complain "why wasn't XYZ taught in school??". Very often the answer is - It was, but you were a bad student.
I think what really makes the situation uniquely toxic is that after reading your comment, I genuinely have no idea which side you're referring to that you think is getting total impunity.
Note: You don't need to reply and specify which. Apparently you've picked a side, as have I. No point debating that here I think. But each side would claim that the other is committing war crimes and inhuman acts and not being held to account.
I worked for Amazon in Seattle when Amazon Go first launched. As you'd expect, lots of SDE teams made games out of trying to fool the thing in various ways.
A few attempts were successful early on (passing items back and forth, one person moving something to the wrong shelf and another person picking it up, people dressing in identical outfits, etc), but the success rate in fooling the system was very very low. No method of trying to trick it that I ever heard of worked consistently, and it definitely seemed to get harder to fool the longer the store was open.
At the time I thought that whatever algos were being run on the camera feeds were getting better. Knowing that it was basically all manual, I'm not sure what the explanation is for the store seemingly getting harder to fool over time. Possibly just placebo, or people lost interest in trying so hard to fool it.
Probably fewer patrons and similar number of employees in the sweatshops. More eyes per patron leads to fewer errors. Or maybe they trained the best grocery cv model around from having a big high quality dataset, and you were fighting it. But then I'd think the tech would've been passed to whole foods instead of packing up shop, so final guess is sweatshop singularity theory.
First - Cultural differences are almost certainly at play here if you're not American. My only exposure to non-American workplace culture is a single German friend, and familiarity with how Linus Torvalds operates. Suffice it to say, cutting across someone to say "bullshit" would be considered "heated" in most American tech workplaces, no matter how calm your tone of voice and body language is. I'm struggling to find a way to say this without sparking a discussion I definitely don't want, but this kind of goes hand in hand with all the inclusion and sensitivity training that was very popular in American corporations until very recently. You can't really emphasize the importance of always being kind and inclusive and butterflies and rainbows without creating a culture that's a bit more sensitive about people acting in any way pissed off.
Second - I'm not sure I'd call the choice of call participants a "power move", just standard American hyper-legally-conscious practice. Surprise layoffs or pip firings are usually done with an HRBP you've probably never met before leading the call. Sometimes the manager may be there but frequently they won't talk much or at all.
Third - Not necessarily. The others may have been struggling to close sales as well. The only things I know about this whole thing come from reading the text in the OP and watching the tiktok video so I could easily be missing it, but is there any evidence that this is anything other than letting go of sales people who aren't performing? I think this is extremely common in sales, it's pretty cutthroat. You close deals or you don't, and companies are always asking "what have you done for me lately?"
i mean if you need "sensitivity training" or have a job that is called "HRBP" that proves the point of the guy you reply to? It's just a lot bullshit speak with no honesty in it
If you have a monitor that can serve as a USB hub (pretty easy to find) and has a thunderbolt input (less easy to find but there are options), you can hook multiple machines up to the monitor and use `ddccontrol` to toggle the monitor's active input. The devices hooked up to the monitor via USB can then follow the monitor to any of the connected computers.
I have my mouse, keyboard, and webcam plugged into my monitor. The monitor is connected to both my work laptop and personal desktop. I wrote a script using `ddccontrol` that I have bound to a hotkey on the laptop and desktop which toggles the active input. Switching the display and USB peripherals back and forth between the two machines is just a keyboard hotkey.
The commands look something like this:
`ddccontrol -r 0x60 -w 3855 dev:/dev/i2c-7 >/dev/null 2>&1'
With the exact arguments dependent on your particular hardware.
Damn, I didn't know usb on monitor was a thing. This could work for me if I get a new monitor since I use a single display for multiple boxes. Maybe I could try Synergy too with the ddccontrol command
Just tried it and my initial impressions are hugely positive. The main things missing that I frequently use like wrap around for focus and assigning applications to specific workspaces already have open issues that you've engaged on too!
I've been using i3 for over a decade now and hate using any computer that doesn't have it, been trying to find a suitable substitute for my work mac for ages. Amethyst, rectangle, magnet, yabai, each had its own problems. The virtual workspace idea is genius and solves some of the biggest issues with those alternatives. This is by far the closest thing to i3 on mac I've seen. Thank you so much for making this.
My suggestion: open up a way to take donations to the project, and/or sell a packaged version on the mac app store. I'd be happy to pay good money for this.
I ask because this is exactly the type of comment one of my siblings would make, and she is on the spectrum. She wouldn't be able to understand the social dynamics at play here, whereas for other folks it's just common sense. "Optional" is not really optional in some social settings, and that's something autistic folks struggle with being aware of, much less understanding. The activity may be optional in the most pedantic sense; you won't be struck down by lightning if you decide not to participate. But there will be consequences.
All of which is another reason why this whole exercise is an awful idea, considering that the number of autistic folks in software engineering is probably a bit higher than the population baseline.
reply