• 0 Posts
  • 102 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 10th, 2023

help-circle
  • This isn’t exactly the type of work tons of astronomers are doing, nor does it cut into their jobs. Astronomers have already been using ML/algorithms/machine vision/similar stuff like this for this kind of work for years.

    Besides, whenever a system identifies objects like this, they still need to be confirmed. This kind of thing just means telescope time is more efficient and it leaves more time for the kinds of projects that normally don’t get much telescope time.

    Also, space is big. 150k possible objects is NOTHING.










  • Yup, this is what I’ve always done for interviews.

    Technical questions are purely to see what background someone has and how they explain or reason their way to some sort of answer. Its also nice to see if someone will say they don’t know something but offer their best guess, which is always a good indicator. I’ll usually provide the answer right away after they’ve answered, both to boost confidence for correct answers and because a quick explanation has a tendency to ease tension, especially if they then relate it to some other knowledge they have or suddenly recall the info with a little help.

    The other thing I do is ask questions about disagreements with previous coworkers or managers. If someone starts explaining themselves into being superior to others, it’s a red flag. Its nice to get an idea for how someone resolves conflict or what kinds of complications they’ve run into, but I mostly just want to see how they view themselves compared to others.

    I know my approach is sometimes strange to others doing hiring with me, but it’s all pulled from my time as an education major (I switched out after 3 years to another degree) and real world teaching experience. Good teachers ask questions to understand how a student learns and what they know broadly, not to get an exact percentage of points. (State/district testing requirements aside)

    A new thing I’ve been trying instead of live coding is having people map out a loose architecture for some sort of API data process or frontend data process, then walking us through it. Its more or less a pseudo coding excercise, but it takes the stress of actual language knowledge away. I’m not sure if it’ll stick long run, but it’s been an interesting experience.



  • Thats absolutely possible via the underlying WebPayments API. The payment “wallet” is linked in the HTML (at least for web pages, RSS, podcast RSS, etc) so someone could design an app that reads these links as QR codes.

    The whole point of WebPayments is that and payment solution that you (the “spender”) wants to use which is compatible can be used to send money to any compatible wallet.

    Whether the payment solution is via government backed, banking systems, or crypto, all it needs to be is compatible.








  • Not the biggest fan either but sometimes it’s the only way to organize a response in text with multiple layers of context. Far to easy in async discussion to branch off and it can be difficult to circle back or ask for clarification while addressing other items and it provides a way to organize.

    I’m not here to have an in depth academic, cited, philosophical discussion. Not right now. I understand that you are pushing more in that direction and there’s nothing wrong with it. As such, I’m not formulating arguments or discussing with that in mind. We don’t need to have a discussion of dismissal of evidence because I’m sure we’re on the same page. But I don’t owe you a perfectly crafted argument in a Lemmy thread. This is informal, and as such there are times where one has to leave space for less rigid constructs for presenting evidence.

    I’ve found this frustrating. But I don’t think you are outright trying to troll which is why I’ve engaged. I hope you understand that I’m not going to engage at the level you might wish I would. (Its exhausting to do so in a context like this even though I’m an academic and philosophical discussion-minded person at heart)

    I’m more concerned about the methodology of the ban and its downstream effects of it than whether (in your case, extremely valid criticism) amounts to it deserving a ban. I’m not going to find some articles for you or counter that because it’s not something I want to spend my time doing since the reality is extremely nuanced and we could present evidence from both perspectives for days.

    In an effort to combat this, would it be fair to say your position is that while TikTok is bad, it’s okay to still use it because it’s extremely popular, and thus the ability to do things like engage or organize with other people in your subcultures is consequently quite high? “The good outweighs the ill” as it were? Which is a reasonable position to take, to be clear, even if your actual feelings are more nuanced.

    More or less. I think there are plenty of things to criticize the platform for and/or strive to adopt a less-bad platform for. Users of the platform should be allowed to stay or not stay, and not be abruptly cut off for a political stunt by an authoritarian act of government, and as such, my position is that celebrating this particular ban is antithetical to the overall goals that one would expect from people using the fediverse.