Legislation is much worse than organically derived common law, for the common law comprises decisions that apply to particular conditions with all their details while the former are mere idealizations.
Yes, I would argue that it would be better for more to have been incarcerated, for that would bring greater focus to injustice and the law would be changed. Selective enforcement interferes with the feedback mechanism that would otherwise make the law work better.
What does this even mean? Are you trying to imply that funding for research that lead to the various tech powering the modern internet was done only by organizations that never before or since considered trying to source candidates from a variety of places because they believe different viewpoints have value?
Or are you trying to hang this entire thing on a definition of DEI that somehow always and exclusively means illegal race or gender based discrimination (I assume against white men)?
These conversations are so absurd sometimes. I'm baffled by how spitting mad people can decide they are to fight these straw men. Then I'm annoyed by (and suspicious of) the overwhelming silence from most of these sources when it comes to other obvious examples of racial discrimination or things like the government trying to remove history books that mention slavery.
Go was a response, in part, to C++, if I recall how it was described when it was introduced. That doesn't seem to be how it ended it out. Maybe it was that "systems programming language" means something different for different people.
Most people weren’t happy when the 2008 crash happened, and bank bailouts were needed, and a global recession ensued.
Most people here are going to use a coding agent, be happy about it (like you), and go on their merry way.
Most people here are not making near trillion dollar bets on the world changing power of AI.
EVERYONE here will be affected by those bets. It’s one thing if those bets pay off if future subscription growth matches targets. It’s an entirely different thing if those bets require “reasoning” to pan out.
You're completely missing the point of OP's comment, and strangely, ironically lending credence to your interpretation of that comment lol (self-inflicted harm).
We don't have a good scientific or philosophical handle on what it actually means to "think" (let alone consciousness).
Humanity has so far been really bad at even using relative heuristics based on our own experiences to recognize, classify, and reason about entities that "think."
So it's really amusing when authors just arbitrarily side-step this whole issue and describe these systems as categorically not being real but imitating the real thing... all the while not realizing such characterizations apply to humanity as well.
Could it be that your particular position required more ongoing learning, and that has kept you better prepared for a changing world?
What fraction of positions require that ongoing learning, or at least to that degree?
Also, consider many other jobs, are they doing their job, and the doing of their job itself provides the experience that makes you a more valuable worker? Or is the doing of the job basically a necessary distraction from the actual task of preparing yourself for a future job? What fraction of humanity actually takes on two jobs, the paying job and the preparing-for-the-next-job? Might doing the latter get you fired from the former? Most importantly, is doing that latter job getting more important over time, that is, are our jobs less secure? If so, is this what is an improving economy, rising, as it were, with GDP?
This has slowed down as I've gained experience but basically I am always volunteering to work on stuff I only have a shaky understanding of or never have done before. If I'm not doing new things on a job for ~1 year or more I get extremely uncomfortable, or start learning on my own. People call it "resume building" but I usually work for small skeleton teams where there's a ton of work available for someone that just volunteers to do it. That was basically how I crawled into my terraform/IAC niche, I was on a team where that was needed, they weren't going to hire, and no one else volunteered to take it on.
if you are in computer engineering and you are not doing "ongoing learning", you deserve to be left behind. While the company should provide some opportunities for learning, ultimately, it is your responsibility.
I tend to hop into projects even if I only have a cursory knowledge of the platform and spend time ferociously reading the docs as I catch up to speed.
I ask a lot of questions of those who do know parts of it. If I hear something I don't know or understand in a meeting I always write it down and research it later.
In a dev environment, I poke at things. Back up that config file, tweak some things, see what happens. Take stuff apart, put it back together. Revert things to put it back when I'm done. It's the dev environment, it's supposed to be shaken up and messed with.
With code, I find a good debugger for whatever new platform I'm trying to get into. Put some break points into interesting spots, step into to the function, step into, step into. See what's really happening. Inspect all the things. How does this thing actually tick? Watch it spin.
When an employer offers any time for training, I take it. I try and get as much out of it as I can. My employer offers some continuing education reimbursement. I use it.
And I try and also teach things at my place of employment. This forces me to actually challenge what I do know and really dig into the topic. Sometimes I find out what I thought I knew wasn't really true! We have a regular meeting on Monday afternoons to share and talk technology. I usually talk Kubernetes and containers on the third Mondays, digging deep into how all that stuff actually works. And it's not just me rambling for an hour, we usually get good discussion going about the focus on the talk and I end up learning something knew even though I'm the one presenting!
Make time in your work schedule to spend some time learning every week. Make yourself a 30 minute or 1 hour recurring meeting with only you.
And finally, there's probably a lot of small dead time moments you have in your life. I'm not saying make all of those focused on learning tech, but if even a third of the time you would have spent doing something else unproductive you instead catch a few more minutes of a training or listen to a lightning talk from a programming conference you'll slowly still glean new stuff and find more topics to dig into when you get a chance.
reply