home_boi

The booze thing gets exaggerated at many places. It is usually the marketing/HR/business dev/sales teams that indulge in that culture. The engineering team is usually much more constrained in their alcohol consumption, although the media groups them with the frat boys from sales.

I agree. The act of deleting the account isn't even a guarantee that the data associated with the account will be deleted.

That's par for the course at unicorns/non public companies though. Both their cash and equity portions are fair (really good for unicorns actually) from what I've heard

Genuine question, what user tracking is there that isn't opt out?

PAC: A political action committee (PAC) is a type of organization that pools campaign contributions from members and donates those funds to campaign for or against candidates, ballot initiatives, or legislation

Tech companies have been annoyingly left for a very long time. I'd like to see more parity. It becomes annoying to have people make questionable political statements (especially HR) and not have the ability to speak up without being called names.

> The attraction about joining these companies a few years before probable IPO is you have not insignificant potential to increase your income above the average tech worker income level.

I would argue that it is more about having the power to make a big difference (however cliche that sounds) and working on new projects (as opposed to maintaining code)

I am assuming he means $100k per person in NYC/SF. That's the entry level salary for even marketing/business workers in many companies.

It doesn't seem like that study normalizes for quality of college degree. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the average "ranking" (used as a proxy for quality) of the alma matter of black people is worse than that of other races.

Has no one done a study on the amount of time each race spends studying? It seems to be a very easy data to collect and could help us draw an actual conclusion.

That is exactly the case. Look at the companies that scream the loudest about diversity and have diversity internship programs(FB, MSFT, Google). Smaller companies do not have the budget to hire "diversity officers". They spend their budget hiring the best people they can find.

it's already being done at many big companies. I believe that FB is one of the biggest offenders

Is there anyway to delete/DMCA those white page websites (whitepages.com, spokeo, instantcheckmate, etc.) that list all your relatives and your past physical addresses?

There would need to be at least ~50-60 years before evaluation of the results

There needs to be at least 2 generations that have had UBI for their entire life. UBI affects the motivation to work on skills, so the subject would need UBI for their entire life.

The parents of the subject also needs to have UBI for their entire life because the parents could transmit the scarcity, pre-UBI mindset onto the subject. There is a still chance that the pre-UBI mindset of the grandparents could be transmitted to the subject. Ideally the subject would be at least 3-4 generations removed from the start of UBI

The free market wins.

All the AI/ML engineers were going to FB/Google/etc. (and on some rare occasions M$)

almost every other good tech company interviews using the same types of questions

>Uber

Some teams do

The cost to manufacturers (and the cost passed on to Google) is most likely much higher for security updates than for including Google+/Google Apps

>My wife has seen this, being one of the hires made to fill a quota while working at EA.

Can you elaborate on this? I'm very curious how far companies go to fill quotas and how much weight is put into race/gender.

Isn't it illegal to make pay based on a protected class?

you still lose if you're an asian/indian/white male.

I care about this topic because I don't want to be discriminated based on my race or gender.

It is a zero sum game. Companies will require the same head count regardless of its racial/gender composition.

At best, companies right now are lowering the bar on who they give interviews to when an under represented minority is involved (who ends up being upper middle class and privileged anyway, just like how AA works). Organizations are also providing resources and networking that I do not have access to.

On average, I suspect that some companies actually discriminate based on race/gender against white/asian/indian males when comparing interview performance with minorities.

At worst, the equal opportunity act is abolished and corporate affirmative action is allowed. This sound crazy but colleges are still able to discriminate based on race/gender so it's not that far fetched.

Not necessarily. That model completely removes the individual and community as actors in society. What you are saying is that all accomplishment of a person is due to society "acting on that person" to make that person successful. Everything that happens can be labeled as discrimination with that kind of model, making it a completely useless model.

Is society "discriminating" against communities and individuals when some individuals and communities value education and spend more time studying than others?

In practicality the OP is right. You won't be on the same level as people with a PhD in a corporate or applied setting. The hardest parts are feature engineering, researching and statistical analysis (presenting research to team). It's hard to gain all those skills without years of experience researching in an academic setting.

As an undergrad, I was doing all those easy ML tutorials and took an undergrad level ML course. I thought I would be useful in actual practice, but knowing the whats/hows of neural nets/clustering/etc. is not enough. Feature engineering/math is the most difficult part. In a corporate setting, if it was a straight forward solution, you wouldn't be doing that work because the solution would be trivial and already implemented.

As an engineer with only a bachelors on a ML team full of PhDs there is a definite difference in skill. I've been reduced to a monkey (a content one) that works on the data pipeline. Learning to deal with real world ML problems would take me years of work that I am not sure I would be willing to do, especially when the pay increases per effort expended learning ML is much lower than with regular software/distributed systems/etc..

On the interest part, you're right that I would never have tried to learn ML if I had known the amount of work that is required to actually be good or if I tried learning the math first. That's the real world though. The useful ML engineers did learn the math. The efficient way to learn ML is to learn the math/statistics first.

That's not very comparable. People who reveal their gender online are a very specific set. Not many people (male or female) reveal their gender online.

On online sexual harassment: The women who are in the spotlight are normally harassed for their political beliefs (which they are very flamboyant about), not for their gender. People who air out their political beliefs publicly are harassed whether they are a males rights activist, feminist, conservative, etc.

the info to root your device is free on the internet

I was going to say, top engineers are paid $100-$200/hr at work. Unless they are doing it as charity work, they would be very unaffordable.

Although if the person looking for a tutor is very junior, then he can learn from basically any senior engineer.

And free food. Can't forget about the free food.

IIRC, Boy's Life magazine is run by a boy scout organization while Girl's Life is run by a corporation chasing for the most eyeballs possible.

This will take "it's just a prank bro" to a new level.

The two platforms are completely different. The users of FB (and LinkedIn) put their real information on the website, allowing advertisers to target effectively which raises the average ad value on the website. Intuitively, revenue = ad value * # impressions.

Twitter is in between anonymous forums (unfortunately they all died) and FB/LinkedIn in terms of ability of advertisers to target users. They're living off of high impressions, and they've basically already saturated the market. Now they need to somehow raise ad value, which would mean integrating hundreds of free, quality services to gather data like Google or tying Twitter accounts to real identities (like the Google+ attempt)

Thiel