joshuamcginnis

I think landing (and keeping) a job in tech is challenging, whether you're a recent graduate or a seasoned professional with decades of experience. While the reasons for rejection may change with age, the key factors for getting hired remain the same: competency and collaboration. Demonstrating strong skills and being easy to work with will always be valuable—focus on these, and opportunities will follow. - a 40's something developer with 20+ years experience

That's not accurate. The Pentagon, for example, has not passed its annual financial audit since it was first required to undergo them in 2018.

TIL about oklch()

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/color_value...

If it's not subject to itself, then it's claiming an exception to its own rule, which makes it self-defeating. A universal claim about truth can't exempt itself without contradiction.

Apologetics comes from the greek work "apologia" which means "speaking in defense".

From where are you deriving your sense of "pointlessness"? If there is no absolute standard (such as God), then all truths, including moral truths, are determined by individuals or societies, making them relative.

> Nothing true can be said about God from a posture of defense.

This is a self-defeating statement. The statement itself is a claim about God. If it is true, then it contradicts itself because it asserts a truth about God (namely, that no truths can be defended about Him). This undermines its own premise.

Let's say an experienced engineer is starting Euler for the first time. What's the best way to approach it given that many of the problems require some prerequisite algorithmic knowledge to solve? Is there a good method for approaching Euler and LeetCode problems with new eyes aside from reading the solutions first, studying them and then solving it many times until committed to memory?

I asked it:

> How can the Qur'an acknowledge the Torah (Tawrat), Psalms (Zabur), and the Gospel (Injil) as divine revelations from God (Allah) yet deny the deity of Jesus Christ. Don't these contradictions falsify the truth of the text?

It gave the classic counter argument:

> A: The Qur'an acknowledges the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel as divine revelations from God, emphasizing their role as guidance for their respective communities. However, it also teaches that these scriptures were either altered or misinterpreted over time.

Of course, the Qu'ran makes these theological assertions rather than one grounded in concrete historical or manuscript evidence. Nevertheless, your app does a good job at fairly representing the beliefs of the Qur'an.

There are over 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament that overlap with more than 90% consistency. This makes it one of the most well-preserved and reliably transmitted ancient texts in history.

This is very cool sir. I'm also learning Koine Greek and I'm looking forward to trying this out.

This reminds me an article I saw a while back about how thinking about ones tinnitus actually made it worse.

Every religion makes truth claims. Many of those truth claims contradict each other. It's incumbent upon us to do the research, put the claims to the test and come to the most reasonable conclusion as to what is true.

I have a lot of respect for Messianic Jews; they're struggle is real. I wish more Jews knew just how Jewish the story of Jesus actually is. As far as Christians are concerned, Jesus is the fulfillment of the messianic prophecies in the old testament. Jesus said, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill." (Matthew 5:18)

That said, there is arguably no simpler or purer form of Christianity than simply having faith in and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Did I just train a spam bot to use my voice?

I highly recommend folks read Ecclesiastes, which opens with "Everything Is Meaningless". It's a philosophical book on what matters in life (and what doesn't).

  What do people gain from all their labors
    at which they toil under the sun?
  Generations come and generations go,
    but the earth remains forever.
  No one remembers the former generations,
    and even those yet to come
  will not be remembered
    by those who follow them.

Is there anything out there yet that will let me issue the command:

> Refactor the api folder with any recommended readability improvements or improvements that would help DRY up code without adding additional complexity.

Then I can just `git status` to see the changes?

HN literally posted a video on how broken the public funding system is (in Physics) days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41808127

This broken system doesn't just stop at Physics. If you watch the video, she does a great job at explaining what exactly is broken.

I'd love you to watch that video and then come back and explain to me why she is wrong and why the system is actually working well and as-intended.

Those are great questions worthy of debate. But we shouldn't just give up on those hard questions and say that all research is worthy of public funding should we?

My agenda is that I think it's completely rationale to ask about the merits of publicly funded research and debate that topic. You may not like that question or my responses, but that is my assertion here.

That's a lot of ambiguity for a scientific paper. Even if it's true (Cats are about 60-70% water), that's not the point of the title.

I suspect its because it makes for a catchy headline.

Why do you trust these people when for the most part, they are unelected bureaucrats serving their own self-interests?

Fair enough and all great points. I think we're more aligned than not on the fundamentals here. Folks seem to be reacting negatively to my even propositioning these questions without even having made a judgment on the merit of the study myself.

It's entirely rational and reasonable for someone to at least ask and receive a decent response to the question, "Why should my tax dollars have been used to funded this research?" Academia should have great responses lined up which garner continued support from the public.

But the fact that we aren't even allowed to ask questions without immediately being shut down as dissenters of all publicly funded research is problematic.

Public research should absolutely be at least partially evaluated by the very people funding it to begin with.

Thanks for your kind response! Are you familiar with the Replication Crisis? What happens when most of the "hypothesis" being challenged can't be rightly replicated in the first place?

And what happens when the primary means of funding is attached the volume of papers and not the quality or impact, as is what I believe to be the case generally here in the US?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

So what exactly is your criteria for when a study should or should not be publicly funded?

What I'm trying to call out is that not all studies are equally valuable nor should they all be publicly funded. Would you at least agree me on that?

That's right. This study falls under the parent grant entitled:

> Péter Pongrácz: The human as a limited resource - a new paradigm to understand social behavior in dogs (Eötvös Loránd University)

Comparing the advent of the internet with a study on the flexibility and agility of cats in tight spaces isn't exactly apples to apples.

Code and biology. For me, the constraints locally are typically quality and speed of generating responses.