verve_rat

The premise of my comment was: if a person passes an interview using some tool and then uses that same tool to do the job, then didn't the interview work?

You found a person (+ tool combo) that can do the job. If that person (+ tool combo) then proceeds to do the job adequately, is there a problem?

If you present a scenario in which a person passes the interview and then doesn't do the job, the you are answering a question I didn't ask.

To you scenario I would respond: the interview wasn't good enough to do its job, the whole point of the interview process is to find people (+ tool combos, if you allow) that can do the job.

That's not the point I was making. The full quote is:

>Anyone can ace and interview and then slack off once they have to job.

In that a person can pass an interview, get hired, and then not do the job. An interview will never tell you if you will get poor job performance with 100% accuracy.

I mean... if the interview process is even a little broken then doesn't that mean that over time worse and worse interviewers will get hired, making for worse and worse interviews meaning that worse and worse interviewers get hired...

The problem is that a good interview is only vaguely related to getting a good employee. Anyone can ace and interview and then slack off once they have to job.

If someone aces the interview using an LLM and then does good work using that same LLM then what should the employer or other employees care? The work is getting done, so what's the problem?

Compare a shitty worker to a deceptive one using an LLM. They both passed the interview and in both cases the work isn't being done. How are those two cases different?

There is at least one landless sovereign entity at the moment[1], but they don't have a ccTLD as far as I know.

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_Military_Order_of_...

>A car centric life is not sustainable for the planet.

How so? If we waved a magic wand and all cars became EVs powered by renewable energy, what would be unsustainable?

Your original advice was:

>Avoid collars because they get stuck on branches(even the ones that are designed to come undone easily can)

That doesn't mention the problem of freezing. Again, I'm just pointing out that your personal experience might not be a solid basis to provide advice to pet owners all over the world, and in fact, could be detrimental.

What if a pet owner lives in a place where a wet collar won't freeze because they don't get "real" winters. What if a collar would help return a lost pet to its family?

Your experience is not universal and people are just pointing that out to you.

It makes it wrong for places where a wet collar won't freeze.

Generalising from your experience to the entire globe can be unhelpful sometimes.

Which can be paid for by selling hardware devices.

The world does not own Apple any level of profit.

And the ridiculous thing is, streaming services should be better for slow burning, loyalty building IP. It doesn't matter when your friend tells you about the thing they like, you can start from the start anytime.

The loyal fans will watch and rewatch the old episodes for years and years to come.

This cancel early and often model is the exact opposite of the business model streaming services should use.

But 2 years isn't long enough. A washing machine or an oven should last at least a decade.

I'd like to see a legally mandated warranty system where a new appliance should last 5 years with no repairs, and 20 years with repairs that total no more than 25% of the original purchase price.

What is a grey collar culture?

Somewhere between blue and white, or something else?

I totally agree with all of this. It used to be that Retail Salesperson was a career you could do until you retire. But now employers really do not pay the sales people enough to care.

And, you do have to give it to him... he did kill Hitler.

I am aware of trademark becoming generic words and losing protection. But that is a process of a trademark becoming so wide spread in usage that courts find that it is just a common word now. Courts look a common usage, not a tally of all the times the trademark holder didn't defend the trademark.

A trademark might still be generic-ified even if the holder attacks every use of it.

If Valve ignores this one, and decides to attack some other project selling something with a Portal trademark on it, the courts won't look at this case and say "but you didn't do anything that time".

The whole premise of "defend it or lose it" is a misunderstanding of how trademarks becoming generic.

I think you missed something there...

They can always grant projects like this a non-commercial licence.

Also, the aggressively protect your trademarks or lose them thing is a myth.

Only if that works for you, though.

For me to write stuff down in real time I basically have to turn off the understanding part of my brain and become a dumb pipe of sounds goes in ear to words on page.

I can hear and write, or I can listen and learn, not both.

Sure, but there is still a point to be made that IEEE think that, while this is not their opinion, it is worth reading.

You might publish contrary opinions to spur debate, but you don't publish things you think are total garbage.

The IEEE thinks this is worth reading.

Yeah, parliament is sovereign, the checks and balances are (meant to be) internal to parliament.

That may break down a bit with modern parties and modern elections, I guess we will see if these systems still work in another couple of hundred years.

25% of people living in NZ were not born in NZ. Add to that, NZ was founded out of an agreement between the British Crown and some, not all, of the Iwi (indigenous tribes) that already lived there.

Tell me that NZ is a homogeneous place with no cultural or political divisions that make working together tricky, go on.

Sounds like South Carolina follows a Westminster style government. Look at the UK, NZ, AU governments (and I assume Canada, don't know for sure): A King, or Governor-General, with the theoretical power to override parliament. A Head of State which can issue decrees and makes important decisions "on the advice of the Prime Minster".

Basically a figure head and a bunch of legal fictions wrapped up in the concept of "The Crown". But the real power lies with the PM and their Cabinet. But the party in charge can change the PM whenever they want, and if it ever got bad enough Parliament can change the party in charge without waiting for an election.

The PM is responsible to the Cabinet and to their party and to the rest of Parliament. It is all one big mess of ambitious people pointing guns at each other, constantly evaluating their position ahead of the next election.

Genuine question: Do you think that people in countries with strong labour laws are signing up to be literal slaves?

If money is being allocated away from tech, where is it going to?

Which is the lesson Star Trek has been learning over the last several years. Play to the fandom, and grow the fandom over time.

Making a thing into a different thing, unsurprisingly, alienates the people that pay you money for the first thing.

That doesn't mean that these IPs (and their fandoms) can't evolve, but you need to tell good stories that respect the universe they are set in.

I don't disagree with your fundamental message, but as a non-American watching from the sidelines, what are you doing in a practical sense, other than whining on an internet forum?

So no actual advice then...

Your first point assumes that it is easy to identify top tier talent during the hiring process and that tech employment is not a market for lemons [1].

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

The norm in US companies. Note that other places manage to lay people off with much more humanity.

Yup, that might work for stackoverflow, or the math stackexchange, but not for 99% of the other sites under the umbrella.