Every game becomes boring once figured out. I personally like to explore "meta" on my own. Once I know it I leave game to others as it's usually boring to me.
I think meta is basically experimentally determined constrains that limit reasoning tree and make problems computable/easy. LLMs/AI needs to start figuring something like this out on their own to make progress. RL kinda does it but maybe there's a better way.
To add to this. Scientific progress seems to slow when some of these constraints are incorrectly defined leading or blocking valid search trees, which suggest that humanity determines then but also wrong sometimes. Thus we need to really on formal proofs that are 100% reliable as well and revisit these constraints from time to time.
Indeed - I've legitimately considered creating a fake profile at this point to make myself look more Jr with about 10 years of experience. I don't really have much to lose in trying it.
I've been at the receiving end of ageism, and what i now do is drop off some of the older experience(s) from my resume, etc. Also, i try to avoid listing my graduation year from university. Some people suggest even if not fighting off ageism, its only relevant to list the last decade of experience on a resume anyway...so if i ever get questioned, i'd use that as an excuse...but, my strategy is simply to get my foot in the door to an interview without getting caught by the "age police" in HR. (If someone thinks that there's no such thing as a sort of filter - what i called "age police" - within HR, then you have wool over your eyes.)
So, my suggestion is maybe there's not a need to create a fake profile, but maybe trim yours a bit. Good luck!
I'm in my early 40s and struggle at times because although my hair is black, my beard is entirely silver, which (I think) adds 10+ years to me.
And while I'm at the IC5/6 level in Product, I still worry about it, and think if I had to find a new job, sorry, fiancée who loves my beard, it has to go, or I think I'm going to have a hard time.
Yeah, if i were you and needed to win job interviews, i'd simply trim it - if only temporarily. Although, its sad of me to say, i agree with @logicchains that it might not be a bad idea to dye your beard....but i suppose might be easier to simply cut it. /sigh
This is sad but good advice. I'm in my late 40s, and my hair is getting pretty gray, so I've started using comb-in color to tone it down. It's not about vanity; I just want to avoid standing out as older than many people around me.
I've had some amazing experiences in my career, but I've started dropping off some of my older work. I don’t include my graduation date on my resume, for example. I have nearly 30 years of solid, relevant experience, but I need to trim it down to the last 12 years or so.
Ageism is incredibly difficult to prove. Plus, you don’t want your name in the paper as someone who sues employers; it can make you seem toxic to future employers.
The whole of it is sad...I mean, that fact that all of us beginning at a certain age need to begin to activate some life hacks is sad in so many ways. I wonder also, what did our peers 1 or 2 or 3 generations ago do at a certain point in their life to cope against ageism...assuming ageism was even a pronounced thing? (I say "pronounced" because i assume there has always been a thing of kicking the older folks to the pasture, but not sure if it was the same as nowadays.) /sigh
Ageism.
Two decades of experience, depending on your role, might be seen as a downside. E.g, if you have been an engineer for two decades (not staff+), the question is why that person is not “motivated” to grow. Another reason is that juniors can be cheaper and easier to mold.
Two decades of experience for someone looking for a VP position is a different story, with different challenges.
I wouldn't even call it ageism. Its crazy-making x nepotism. People have stopped treating companies as a vehicle to deliver something into the economy, instead its like a great big Mastadon to be clung to like a tick and sucked dry. Fuck the accountant regime.
Sadly I had to install Adobe Reader on my father PC again after he had documents* with formulas. Chrome would calculate the numbers wrong. Everything was off by 10.
If you occasionally need Adobe Reader/Acrobat exclusive features but don't want to install, you can use the free online version of Acrobat. It's pretty decent though it doesn't have all the features:
I'm not who you're responding to, so I don't know what they intended. But sleep issues can certainly lead to memory issues. So, maybe both?
When I was in my mid 30s, I suddenly had extreme memory issues. For example, at dinner time, I had no memory of what I ate for lunch or even if I had lunch at all. I could remember people that I knew, but I could not remember if I talked with them earlier in the day. It was all very scary.
After various neurological tests showed nothing unusual, my doctor thought we should look into sleep issues. It turned out I suffer from something called Delayed Sleep Phase Syndrome - whereas the average person has a natural bedtime that is ~24 hours after they last went to sleep, mine was significantly longer than 24 hours.
My doctor concluded that this was the source of my memory issues. That confused me a bit, as I experienced trouble sleeping my entire life prior to this diagnosis. She explained that the consequences of inadequate sleep worsen as we age.
It was inconvenient for work and social things, but I was able to start living longer days (i.e., don't go to bed until I'm sleepy). Within a week, the recall issues I'd had were a memory (see what I did there?). I was also able to fall asleep much more quickly than I had before, and sleep duration didn't have the wild swings I'd experienced all my life.
If AI makes engineers more productive, then it follows that companies will hire fewer engineers for the same work. So AI is making some engineers obsolete.
On the flipside, it might create more demand for some engineers (or skills in general) as the bottlenecks move "upward" on the skills ladder (if we define that ladder as "how hard is it for AI").
E.g., faster and cheaper compute created more demand for software developers as that demand was no longer capped by the compute bottlenecks. Similarly, faster and cheaper "basic" software development might create more demand for software architects, and so on.
> If AI makes engineers more productive, then it follows that companies will hire fewer engineers for the same work.
History says otherwise. When I started (late 90s I guess) we looked at starting a company. It was going to require things like big iron, rented DC space, teams of people to manage, for what was something that is now pretty simple. Fast forward and the same idea could be done (and has been done) by a couple people using a cheap VPS.
Every productivity enhancer that has happened over my career has not led to fewer jobs, but more. The ability for humanity to consume any excess resource is unmatched. I'm sure there will be some bumps along the way, but any company who thinks they can stay static and replace everyone with AI will get beat out by the companies using AI as a tool to continue to innovate.
Field is evolving for a long time, with more automation/frameworks which make programmers more productive. So far it increased workload and opportunities.
The real issue will happen if suddenly humans will be completely removed from the loop and AI will scale independently.
If AI makes engineers more productive, then it follows that the application of engineering become economically viable on whole new sets of problems. So AI is making engineers even more sought after.
That said, I'm so unimpressed with AI at the moment that I start thinking it's just a bubble, but even if it isen't, it's not going to lessen the need for engieers in the least.
> then it follows that the application of engineering become economically viable on whole new sets of problems.
Agree.
The demand curve for highly skilled SWEs is incredibly robust but has been supply limited. Insofar as AI effectively upskills workers who were just below the demand cliff, this is a boon to workers.
The big shift I see is towards Quality. Implementation has gotten cheaper relative to problem specification and verification.
I don't see why these are mutually exclusive. The point is that those new "engineers" will not necessarily be the same people. Those "good" engineers will enjoy improved productivity and will be more sought after, while those "not so good" engineers will be replaced by AI. As always, any innovation just seems to increase inequality.
On the contrary, AI will _also_ create jobs for people who as of now would be unqualified for engineering.. People who have enough of the right type of thinking, but can't learn to code well enough to be productive, they can now be AI babysitters and integrators.
Vaccination decreases likelihood of transmitting Delta but doesn't absolutely prevent it. Vaccination prevents downstream spread and thus deaths and given the amplification of increasingly larger downstream generations this effect could still be very large when considering the entire population.
https://www.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1mk8ks5/discussion_...