I work in an industry known for frequent large layoffs, so I’m making the connection that many former employees take it personally and say things out of spite. I’m not entirely taking the operators word for it, since he clearly has a reason to be pissed off. As I said though: easy to believe

Yeah, it’s tough here because all wars, especially this one, are so horrible. I do feel sorry for those caught up in it and who suffer the consequences, and I know most Russians are not there entirely willingly. Still, Russia is the perpetrator, they are the cause of this suffering, death, and destruction, and this soldier was clearly participating. He is part of the problem so better him than his intended victims

I thought it was just getting good.

I never actually had an account or much inclination to use it but it seemed like the first online service ubiquitous enough for local government and business notifications. In that sense, it was just starting to be a real benefit for an informed populace

However downvoting as that seemed more like a prerequisite to your posted opinion - I’ll agree that it’s fine for all the loonies to rant at each other there, but that makes the opinion “popular” …… crap, wrong community

That’s one of the many things I don’t get. How did he get elected the first time, how could anyone have voted for someone with a long history of stuffing contractors? Bankruptcies? Questionable tax practices? This guy came in as a well known real estate developer fraud who ripped people off: individuals, small businesses, irs, etc, for decades. How did this ever fly in the first place?

It is a hot topic worthy of discussion, like how could anyone this racist have any positive public standing? How can someone instigating racial hatred and violence not be shut down?

I’d never justify that urge to spend ridiculous money updating every year to the latest and greatest, but people tend to under appreciate the massive improvements from accumulated incremental improvements.

OLED screen on my iPhone X was revolutionary (and I’m sure Android had it first), as just one example, and now most phones are. Personally I find ultrawideband and “find my” very innovative and well implemented. Or if that’s too small a change, how about the entire revolution of Apple designing their own SoC for every new model. There’s emergency satellite texting, fall/crash detection, even Apple mostly solving phone theft is innovative (even if you don’t like their approach)

When we see steady improvements, humans tend to under-appreciate how it adds up

And we’re all ready to believe that, but the article had nothing to support that claim. An easier explanation is someone’s incompetence that they either didn’t think they needed or didn’t know how to use a drone operator or couldn’t keep him supplied/equipped and the accusations are outrage over that.

Being incompetent or having inadequate supplies are certainly bad things but different from being corrupt

Just like always, it depends on how you define or redefine ai. For example, what used to be called ai has been very successful in photo processing. The same thing is going to happen: some portion or incarnation of the current generative ai will be successful, but it will be dismissed similar to “it’s just machine learning, not ai”

I have a lot of hope for Apple’s approach, where they are incorporating it as tools into specific capabilities, and prioritizing privacy. While there’s no direct profit, it should help sell a lot more devices with ever higher tech specs. I also like their “private cloud” model that has a lot of potential beyond private ai

I understand you don’t appreciate where we’ve come from and how fast, can’t see the year to years changes, but the iPhone is just a little over ten years old. Do you really not see huge changes between an early iPhone and today’s?

Sure but the point remains that it’s not in the corps best interest to be too forthcoming with their reasons. It doesn’t benefit them, and can only hurt them

Yeah, and I’m fine with that short term. But only if it’s very short term and only if we use it as a brief reprieve to build out renewable energy faster than otherwise. That seems unlikely

Pension funds are multi-billion dollar funds, so they can afford their own brokers to directly buy a whole company in one-shot, with no repeat business.

They’re not usually run this way. Generally pension funds are the same as your 401k, but on a bigger scale. They also usually focus more attention n managing risk and expenses…… I used to work for a company that did exactly this for some insane number of hundreds of billions of dollars

You might invest part of your 401k in a public shared sp500 index fund, a pension plan might invest part of its money in a private sp500 index plan managed solely for them, usually with lower fees

No, but only because we subdivide what layman think of as IT into many specialties

As DevOps , I whisper to a room full of computers to do what you told them plus do what some others tell you to break what you did, then run a big hammer over it, and hand all the pieces back to you

Huh, I came to say pretty much the same thing. I’m DevOps, more or less, by I tell people I’m a programmer since that’s what I do

But what I meant was that the ultimate hiring process is dictated, signed off on or altered, all the way down, by the wealth holding

Unless it’s a small company, they don’t know anything about you, nor make a decision in any way specific to you. They agreed to a budget expenditure and they want to know the hiring manager followed through. There is no personal connection

And now with AI it’s even worse …… how do I respond that when i asked a technical question, it was suspicious that you looked down, paused several seconds, then appeared to be reading an answer? While being able to use the tools is a prerequisite, that’s not what the interview is for …… but I have to make a judgement call with no proof

Recruiters are essentially salesmen. They want to have a full dossier of product (you) when they talk to a potential client. They might also job hop among agencies, and bringing a full dossier of product helps them get their new job. It’s much easier to build that product inventory with ghost jobs than it is to actually work directly with someone looking for a job.

Maybe it’s my limited experience, but I’ve never worked for an employer that did this, as far as I know. Any opening was real at the time it was posted. However we’ve held onto people if we expect another opening or we like them even though they don’t fit but can’t promise a new opening until we get it approved …… or maybe we got the ok to hire and started the process but were shut down by bad numbers somewhere but hope that will change again

Sure, but it’s perfectly legit to use that to put a plus next to social skills or works well with team.

I’ve definitely dinged people who were too robotic - you do have to interact to successfully do your job.

You’re assuming no candidates are dickheads.

Company has to watch out for

• maybe a candidate was a dickhead
• maybe one of the interviewers was a dickhead
• maybe something changed so it looks misrepresented

My current company makes the effort to at least tell whether you’re still under consideration but I don’t think they’re allowed by legal to give any details.

At least in the US, it’s fine to not give a reason but if you do give a reason you’re liable for it. What company wants to risk that?