tubby12345

easiest way to shortcircuit the process is to reach out to someone through linked in and ask for a referral. if you're really who you claim to be in your profile here then you shouldn't have any trouble getting an interview.

of course they need credentials but undergrad at decent state school is much more widely available credential than ivy+. hell FB hires high school grads into their FBU program (for the gap summer between high school and uni).

like you don't get it: go here https://www.hudsonrivertrading.com/careers/job/?gh_jid=35621... and find the dropdown for school ("what university are you currently attending").

i have no clue what you're saying

>In real life, the ones who will do so are mostly just the ones who it hurts.

you think people grinding LC that make it through are hurt by the process?

>the insanity that's making them miserable

as far as i can tell, sloth, avarice, and greed are making devs miserable (not some bogeyman called LC).

>I just hope I'm not the one that has to maintain it down the road...

i'm good at what i do - my implementations are clean. they got that way (surprise surprise) as a side-effect of me implementing many times.

>least-arbitrary and most accessible ways to jump from one group to the more highly paid one.

exactly. i mean like try to apply to IB at a BB and see if anyone even skims your resume without an ivy+ on it. they can't fathom how good they have it because they've never done anything else (which is, of course, what breeds entitlement).

>I can assure you, 100% without a doubt, that this is where the vast majority of developers are.

cool? then that majority doesn't generate the same value as those that do and so they shouldn't get paid as such? i already asserted that?

>Including people working on the most cutting edge software.

ctrl+f to doubt that you know what people working on cutting edge software do. i, on the other hand, do have some experience on cutting edge compiler tech and it is absolutely what i've described. sorry not sorry.

>can regurgitate this is because they just re-read their course book yesterday and they expect algorithmic problems.

great. i'm glad. they're prepared for tasks being assigned to them that exercise those skills and by the end of the half they'll have a deep understanding rather than just a wrote understanding. either way i'll hire them over someone that thinks it's worthless being conversant in the algorithm.

what was your point? that it's silly to reinvent the wheel over and over. so i gave you an example of a wheel (two) that often needs to be reinvented.

if i need a toposort in my proprietary task scheduling system, or fisher–yates shuffle in my proprietary ranking system, what do you recommend? this isn't hypothetical - i've had these things come up in the last half at work.

I have said this before: it's group therapy for entitled devs that feel they're entitled to oversized salaries just because they have tenure. Young grads accept the process as is. People that are either happy with their comp or comfortable putting in the work do not lament the process - they just accept it and proceed. Only devs that have been doing it a while, whose salaries have plateaued, that either never learned data structures or can't muster the will to review, bemoan the LC grind.

The most utterly absurd instantiation is the dev that's 100% sure that FAANG is going to fail soon because they're passing on people like him/her that are just so talented that they don't need to prove it with any assessment. There's also the MGTOW-esque subgroup that eschews such interviews and will proclaim it proudly, along with their salary.

Personally I'd be embarrassed if I was making a less than obscene dev salary, which is still upper middle class anywhere in the world, and all the while complaining that I deserve more for no added effort.

What's funny is there are other professions where the same sort of multimodal distribution in compensation exists (big law vs everyone else, competitive specialties vs general practice in medicine, IB and PE vs everyone else in finance) and I have never seen members of those communities complain as much as developers do.

Edit:

I have a friend that's trying to break into FAANG (as a DS) who I've been coaching. He has a stats PhD and basically no software training whatsoever, outside of R. Since DS loops still have LC questions it's been very hard for him. I have never heard him once express feelings of resentment over the process - he fails an interview and just goes back to practicing. He's also a first gen immigrant from a very poor part of the middle east. Admittedly it's hard to assign/attribute his perseverance to any particular thing but naive intuition dictates that some of it must be his humility - something that software as an industry seriously lacks.

That's funny with your use of L I figured you'd be at Google and that that tracks with my experience at FB but no one calls it meta except people at meta so I guess I'm just saying that tracks lol

and i'm responding to

>Imagine a place without law enforcement

i don't see the words "cop", "police officer", or "value" anywhere to be found in this red herring (i've taken my pick).

false dichotomy or red herring (take your pick).

>Do you see the contradiction here? I don't think bibliometrics are useful for measuring utility.

that's not a contradiction that's like just your opinion man. it's also the no true scotsman fallacy on your part.

>we should massively

>NSF grants should be redirected to a GRFP-like funding model

>NSF should put a hard upper bound

cool when you replace panchanathan you can institute all of the policies and only then will academia be more egalitarian and possibly more useful to society as a whole. until then you're just playing bait and switch wrt the current state of things.

>I don't understand what your point is

No it's I that don't understand your implicit point that we should let academics fiddle. Is it just because there's some grand narrative around science being objectively and absolutely for the betterment of mankind? The ideological devotion to science as some kind of monastic pursuit blinds you to the very real facts (on the ground) about how much funding is wasted on one off papers, one off projects, whole conferences devoted to areas that will never improve anyone's life or generate absolutely any return on investment.

>Also, I would challenge you to point to a NSF funded idea that is 100% clearly, objectively useless

It's very easy: pick any nsf grant going back as far as you'd like (such that there's enough lead time) and look at the number of citations on the papers generated from the grant. I don't even have to do this because everyone knows that probably 50% of all papers get absolutely zero citations (https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/not-so-many-uncite...).

>It's true that industry could have but they didn't, and that's the point

Again I have no clue what you're claiming here. You're trying to make some kind of case for academic science shouldering the burden of some fraction of fundamental (pie in the sky) research by citing self-driving cars which is positively laughable as an example of such research.

>Sometimes a particular area of inquiry doesn't appear promising until a subsequent invention many years later.

this could be the tagline of every single application to NSF. i'm not sure if you're in academia but there are hordes of projects that are funded that are clearly useless.

>For example, driverless cars were incubated in academia.

are you really claiming that driverless cars weren't immediately obvious as valuable? just because CMU got to it first doesn't mean industry wouldn't have gotten to it.

>you REALLY CAN do what you want! Real freedom; just be useful.

exactly. high-level ICs at FAANG set their own schedules/roadmaps and salaries as long as they pushing expanding the forefront of an area that brings value. the truth is academia is a shelter for a lot of people who can't do useful things.

it depends on what your skillset really is and what areas you're interested in for your phd.

pure theory (finite automata, complexity, computational geometry, optimization)? yea you're probably locked out by virtue of competing against students that have the relevant theory fresher in their heads. note i didn't list ML there because i personally don't consider ML theory heavy (no matter what the wannbes will claim wrt to TDA or whatever).

basically in any other area, if you have true hard skills (e.g., deep systems knowledge, networks, graphics) then you're competitive as long as you have a decent ugrad GPA and can get a decent GRE and some decent letters of rec. the path looks like reaching out to a potential advisor and starting a conversation with them about whatever research of theirs you find interesting.

Man some hn posts bring the cringiest comments; please do tell us which school has functional analysis as a "typical" topic for juniors taking real analysis. Even if you're getting a second helping of real analysis by then, you're probably looking at Lebesgue integration on R and such, rather than general topological spaces.

I'll never understand why some people try to flex on an anonymous forum.

This is so charitable thank you. But please tell me are you this charitable when some derivative node package gets published? Or python library? Or when the 100th data science startup is announced?

>Quite impressive results nevertheless!

How does it remain impressive? Is this just deference to the institutions of the authors? Or the general aura around AI/ML/DL?

A couple of years ago when FB trained some kind of architecture to compute derivatives by presenting it with problem,answer pairs I called it out as "just wrote memorization" and got promptly downvoted. Now here we have people using GPT3 (a network widely recognized to be just memorizing) for a similar task and people are still impressed? Like you said, their only insight was to augment the data and translate to a computable (parsable) form.

I'm guessing people don't understand what a papermill is, especially at these schools that have access to the gobs of compute that you need to make these projects go through. It's junk science - probably not reproducible, definitely not extensible, doesn't transfer out of the sample set - purely for the sake of incrementing publication count for all involved (cf. the number of authors on the paper). And before people label me a hater: I speak from experience as someone at one of these types of schools that has their name on several of the same sorts of "turn the crank" papers.

qq: is the author's style more or less obnoxious than announcing your opinion on someone's writing style when it wasn't solicited?

I know how Viagra works. Do you know what the word blunted means?

couch it however you want but you're deluded if you think your projects stack up against even a BS grad at FAANG if you're discounting their abilities just because they got in through grinding LC.

this is like some kind of reverse occam's razor argument but i feel like your point is blunted by the fact that there are lots of companies making tons of money off of viagra derivatives.

I'm bookmarking this and showing it to everyone that claims Julia is the next big thing. Kudos for really exercising the language despite all of these painful shortcomings (you must be a very patient person).

>Gainesville, FL

never a more laughable thing has there been uttered. UF has an "incubator" that consists of wet labs repurposed for house software startups (we were literally in a room with test tube holders and sinks and no proper desks). there are some random coworking spaces (like the one that doubles as a dorm lolol) but mostly everyone is a complete wantrepreneur. tech talent coming out of UF is also solidly mediocre (anyone good goes to SF or NYC). finally unless you love football and/or nature walks (not hikes) the town is dreadfully boring.

i mean do you speak from experience or is this just more conjecture? what people on the outside fail to realize is that while individual projects might not seem complex (maybe frontend engineering on FB is less complex than pytorch) it's the scale of the systems you have to orchestrate that is incredibly complex.

exactly - the proof is in the eating of the pudding.

>second-raters to grind their stats

so sayeth the people on the outside of companies building the most complex software in the world.

>The department, which says it takes more illegal weapons off the street than any other local police force in the United States, said that it took a record 12,088 guns off the street in 2021.

I don't know who knows this and who doesn't but getting a legal gun in Illinois (especially Chicago) is very hard; Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) cards have 6-12 month wait times. On the other hand, in Indiana it's open season (so to speak)

>Indiana is a shall-issue state with Licenses being issued by the Indiana State Police. There is no License required to purchase a firearm, and firearms do not need to be registered.

This is a fact that is very conveniently omitted by the right-wing media when they castigate democrat run Illinois.