I think what Intel needs is a culture of innovation.
Where things can be experimented with, failed, evaluated with data-driven insights.
I actually think somebody who is creative, can articulate vision, and act effectively on criticism (eg change direction), be just a little less -inclusivity-building and more meritocracy-building -- is all they need.
@nostromo -- you are exactly correct.
The US Fed govnt policies caused inflation, now trying to cool it down through raising interest rates on govn bonds. So investors that were buying commericial bonds, now go and buy govnt bonds.
Then, the commercial bonds (for good sound companies), loose values. Then commercial bonds investors loose their investment...
So the loose-loose sitation were are looking at:
a) continue printing money out of thin air -- raising inflation and indebting the generation of kids who do not even vote yet
b) get the current economy go into depression.
It seems like the current generation, with their choices of leadership and the habits is responsible -- so ( b ) has to be chosen (to be fair).
But since we do not live in the world where accountability is a thing --
( a ) will be selected.
loans to insiders is a form of payment when stock is expected to fail, or the company is expected to get bought out and those folks to get fired.
I do not think it is 'kosher' by any means... but this practice exists in western societies where corruption is hidden behind 'book deals', 'documentary deals', incredibly 'visionary' stock market investors (that sit in US congress and senate), etc.
In other places, same corruption -- but not hidden behind the financial instruments
I think centralized ranking performed by private (or even public entities) -- leads to significant bias (either because of corruption or because of .. bias).
So the solution, it seems, would have to be some system of cooperative, transparently weighted contribution to the ranking process
I am guessing that all these businesses that looked 'cheap' to the money-making, investor-darlings machines (the FAANGs) -- will now get closed.
The inflation apparently, does not just affect the currency value -- it also corrects the value of salaries compared to the outcome.
I am also expecting that 80% of the companies behind the 2,600 apps in this list:
https://theresanaiforthat.com/
will close those efforts down within 2 years.
The next iteration of businesses/sites that come in place of dpreview -- will be ad-ridden, small budget enterprises like
Some DSLRs have function of combining of multiple frames together as well (I think Nikon D500 and latest Olympuses as examples).
This is often called HDR.
The issue with combining images together is that it works for static objects well, but if things move -- it does not. So low-noise digital sensors still seem to offer much better results.
And certainly, startup-time (or app selection time) + focusing speed, is simply unmatched by phones compared to DSLRs or mirrorless with phase focus detection
I do think that Denoising images with AI/ML will be common place even in open source Image processing tools like Rawtherapee.
So DLSRs having APS-C or full frame sensors with lower megapixel count will do well if images are post-processed (or in camera processed) wit these AI tools.
In fact, I was thinking that buying a used DSLR from 2012 circa for 150$ bucks -- will yield similar results as a 2K camera or a 1k smart phone.
Phones are easier to transport/carry. That's has been their reason to take over the lens+camera systems.
But I think camera makers can make photo gear fashionable again :-).
I am working on some ideas in that area :-)
Using prime (not zoom lenses) tend to aid in 'mental' composition that preceeds the physical composition.
A person who had trained themselves taking (and reviewing) 100s or 1000s of pictures of one particular camera, and one or 2 particular lenses of fixed focal length (prime lenses) -- would have developed a mental model of how a given picture will look, before they take it.
It is that 'pre-physical' mental modeling maturity, that allows experienced photographers to transition to artists (same is for film development and analog printing processes, as well) and stay minimalist at that (as far as gear).
Camera makers are aware of this I think.
This is why cameras with non-detachable, single focal length (prime) lenses
are very popular, at any time.
Before it was Yashica Electro 45 [1], now it is Richo GRIII [2]
(as examples).
It is also notable that camera makes who make popular SLRs/mirroless cameras such as Nikons, look for current/modern trends of what a 'favorite focal lenght of a lens' is.
For example Nikon recently announced that they will be making 26mm pancake lenth for their Z mirrorless line.
26mm is an 'unusual' focal length, the standard wide-angle is 28mm. And these lenses are usually not pancakes (pancake means very slim / thin lenses that are barely sticking out of the camera body).
But this 26mm focal length is the length (equivalent) of an iphone camera.
That's clearly why they are picking this unusual focal length -- and making a optically high quality lens that will fit their full-frame Z range of cameras.
The full frame camera sensor (or even APS-C sized or m4/3 sized sensors) allow to take pictures in low light situations with out flash, while still autofocusing reasonably fast -- much better than with a phone camera.
I would also not be surprised if Nikon would also develop a new Z camera body that will be just big (small) enough to just host these small lenses and that will have perfect integration with phone and pocketable.
So that the camera can utilize this lens, creating much better low-light opportunities without a flash (allowing the photography be more discrete, and take advantage of natural shadows in composition).
They will have to solve battery dimension issues (full frame mirrorless requires more power than a smaller sensor.)
Nikon, I suspect, will also probably enable the post processing to utilize new or (even app-store like) filters to add various effects.
Point I wanted to make is that fixed focal length, single lens, single camera -- enables 'trends', mental-model training and probably other interesting features in the whole word of photography that I do not have words for.
Camera makers certainly know this.
So minimalism in that sense is great, but requires a lot of training and practice :-)
Ok, I think we will agree to disagree.
I interviewed 1000s (low 1000s) of people through out my career.
I made mistakes -- but majority of them were on soft-skills sides of the problem.
The university names mattered little, and in many cases effected person's self-promotion efforts/abilities. That has some value, but not when it is 'instead of' high ethics and technical skills.
sorry, but your assessment of what is genuine vs disingenuous, is very disingenuous in itself.
Perhaps, it is time to relinquish the presumptions of moral superiority -- and just discuss technical details without the drama ...
I am saying that you wrote does not cover full spectrum of how the virus replicates, therefore your comment does illuminate the complexity that's present in interaction with our immune system.
Which includes, according to the NIH paper I referenced, antibody-dependent-enhancement (ADE).
It should not be the 'names' of the institutions that are relevant to the job posting, it should be the skills.
In other words employers should not looking for 'how you a acquired skills', but instead for 'what skills you have'.
---
Same as when you publish scientific paper (or a Talmudic treaties, for that matter) before it gets accepted....
It should not be relevant the name of your scientific advisor, institution, or whether you grandparent a famous Rabbi (if we are going with theological texts..)
---
Yes, by eliminating the names of your school from the hiring process you are also eliminating that little detail that the cost of attendance for 1 year undergraduate at , say, Vanderbilt University -- is 80,000 USD [1], and that you could afford it...
But the approach I am suggesting does more than that -- it incentivizes employers to consider skills of the hires, and not the 'image' of the schools they came from.
Which, in turn, will incentive the schools to prioritize education quality over hyper-marketing.
Certainly I am not advocating to hide personal achievements (eg participation in relevant open source projects, STEM olympiad's, or other relevant endeavors that build not just technical skills, but also a good character).
I am also saying that there needs to be a system of incentives, that then, produces, organizational/hiring practices that favor non-tool-specific employment process.
In my view John is an exceptional educator, inspiring, energetic and accommodating to many people.
I do think, however, his 'save the planet' efforts are misplaced. I think the mathematical tooling and theoretical machinery to help technical initiatives in planet saving -- exists.
What does not exist is honesty in country/world wide policy making.
Every crook wants to be viewed as 'idea generator', planet-saving-angel -- as long as tax money get diverted to whatever causes -- through their 'sinks and facets' of control.
I am not advocating to give up -- I am advocating to use talents that these folks have to figure out how to achieve transparency in political, contractual system of incentives.
If they would work with investigative journalism to find who the crooks are, how they divert public money, how they have selective outrage against one entity, but not another doing similar things -- that were the focus should be.
I actually think naming colledge/university where you got your degree, has to be prohibited.
It adds to discrimination and unequal treatment.
Asking if you a have a degree form an accredited university is OK.
But which one of the universities -- is like asking how much are you paying for your rent/house, and what type of neighborhood you are living in (and so asking for address has to be prohibited too)
> Now we've got a huge swath of US citizens that will never take the vaccine
Not only 'the vaccine' (meaning Covid-19) vaccine.
Trust to CDC is lost, trust to FDA is lost, trust to Executive orders on health policies is lost.
Trust to major news networks, trust to health pundits -- is lost.
On top of that, of course, trust for non-health related 'institutions' (eg FBI, CIA, NSA, FISA courts) -- is lost.
Everything from here on coming from the above institutions -- will be viewed with skepticism and distrust.
Hell, probably trust in legitimacy of election process is lost too. Will see, I guess.
My point about the article -- is that fails to consider the whole system in a country like US...
No longer will western politicians be able to point out to authoritarian dictatorships -- from the point of moral authority.
The "Whatabout-ism" is now 'normalized', and will continue be normal discourse of international politics for a very long time.
Historians 200 years from now
2016-2022 will have to be calling this as a 'Period of Pundits & Institutions loosing people's trust' for many of English-speaking countries.
Hiring narrowly focused people with significant pre-existing experience -- Is always costly.
... and I also think, it is practically always a wrong strategy...
I am fundamentally against micro-managing labor pools by federal government.
However, there are need to be economic incentives (including
immigration policies) -- that make it more difficult for
employers to hire for 'tool-centric' positions, unless those tools are very expensive physical devices (eg telescopes, quantum computers, etc).
The incentives need to direct employers at training on the job (not at after-work online classes).
When I see on HN's hire threads -- 'if you have Azure experience -- you will get on top of the pile' -- I cringe.
This is absolutely ridiculous. Same pretty much with Ruby/Php Rust/C++ Haskell/Scala modalities of the same problem.
Yes hire people who understand process/idioms/patters, but invest in the f..ing training -- if you need somebody 'yesterday' to help, get consultants -- and have them help and at the same time hire for full time roles -- and train your internal stuff (possibly, even, have them learn from the consultants).
Afraid of people leaving after acquiring the highly thought-out skills ?
-- implement meaningful compensation/retention policies that reflect effort that you spend on training, and risks that you are taking if a person who was just trained -- leaves.
It appears that COVID-19 can also enter cells (these would be immune cells that came to 'help') via so called Fc-pathway.
Therefore allow the virus to multiply even more
"...
In addition to viral entry via ACE2, antibodies against coronavirus spike proteins (anti-spike-S-IgG) can induce antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) of viral entry via type II Fcγ receptors. ..." [1]
I think what Intel needs is a culture of innovation. Where things can be experimented with, failed, evaluated with data-driven insights.
I actually think somebody who is creative, can articulate vision, and act effectively on criticism (eg change direction), be just a little less -inclusivity-building and more meritocracy-building -- is all they need.
Somebody like Elon Mask.