Possibly a case of a non-native English speaker using AI to translate or help them do their write up. In either case, it sadly makes the reading experience less enjoyable.
But that said, for a UX'er I believe there should be a bit of shame in just doing the obvious amalgam of whatever 2-3 most popular things that already exist.
If you take on the UX lens, there's a lot of flaws in a lot of popular products, but they are accepted by the market because competition is not perfect. Copying that is not great, and I do think there is a point to be made on how "fine" shouldn't be the goal.
AbbVie | AI/Software Engineer | Remote, UK/US/Canada ONLY | Full-time
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript, but great skills are usually transferrable), who enjoys close collaboration with end-users in solving their hardest problems?
Do you have a solid foundation in the AI/LLM-world - or are you great at the above and willing to learn?
Are you well versed in data engineering concepts, and excited to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production? Then I'd love to hear from you!
We are a small team who care deeply about our work as well as about each other. We iterate fast, and err on the side of prototyping and presenting something real, rather than spending hours in meetings and only producing slides.
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality. We've been expanding the team over the past 6 months, and are currently looking to fill a few extra roles only in UK/US/Canada (location, not timezone).
If you fit the above description, hit me up at [email protected] with your resume + a little bit about yourself!
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript, but great skills are usually transferrable), who enjoys close collaboration with end-users in solving their hardest problems?
Do you have a solid foundation in the AI/LLM-world - or are you great at the above and willing to learn?
Are you well versed in data engineering concepts, and excited to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production? Then I'd love to hear from you!
We are a small team who care deeply about our work as well as about each other. We iterate fast, and err on the side of prototyping and presenting something real, rather than spending hours in meetings and only producing slides.
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality. We've been expanding the team over the past 6 months, and are currently looking to fill a few extra roles in UK/EU/NA.
If you fit the above description, hit me up at [email protected] with your resume + a little bit about yourself!
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript, but great skills are transferrable), who enjoys close collaboration with end-users in solving their hard problems?
Do you have a solid foundation in the AI/LLM-world - or are you a great at the above and willing to learn?
Are you well versed in data engineering concepts, and excited to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production? Then I'd love to hear from you!
We are a small team who care deeply about our work as well as each other. We iterate fast, and err on the side of showing a quick prototype of an idea, rather than spending hours in meetings talking about it.
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality. We've been expanding the team, and are currently looking to fill a few extra roles in the UK/EU.
If you fit the above description, hit me up at [email protected] with your resume + a little bit about yourself!
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript, but great skills are transferrable), who enjoys close collaboration with end-users in solving their hard problems?
Do you have a solid foundation in the AI/LLM-world - or are you a great at the above and willing to learn?
Are you well versed in data engineering concepts, and excited to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production? Then I'd love to hear from you!
We are a small team who care deeply about our work as well as each other. We iterate fast, and err on the side of showing a quick prototype of an idea, rather than spending hours in meetings talking about it.
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality. We've been expanding the team, and are currently looking to fill a few extra roles in the UK/EU-timezones.
If you fit the above description, hit me up at [email protected] with your resume + a little bit about yourself!
AbbVie | AI Engineer | Remote, Europe or US | Full-time
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript, but great skills are transferrable) with a solid foundation in the LLM/ML world? Are you well versed in data engineering concepts, and excited to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production with us? Then I'd love to hear from you!
We are a small team who care deeply about our work as well as each other. We iterate fast, and err in the side of showing a quick prototype of an idea, rather than spending hours in meetings talking about it.
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality.
Are you a great coder (Python/Typescript) with a solid foundation in the LLM/ML world and well versed in data engineering concepts, with an excitement to work with the latest GenAI models and bring these solutions into production with us, then I'd love to hear from you!
Our vision for this project is extremely ambitious, and you will be a crucial part of making this a reality. We are a small team who care about our work as well as each other.
Possibly, but this is the situation we're faced with here in Denmark, as our cartel of unions have divided the market in such a way.
I agree that this is not necessarily what "unionization" means specificly, but this is the concrete case here, and thus my caveat as to the importance of the exact definition.
(Also, I am thankful that you are descripting the SU correctly; one gets paid to be enrolled at a qualifying educational institution - paid to study, not paid to get an education, even though this is luckily what happens most of the time.)
In Denmark, our deliveries are currently not unionized, although there is a large debate around it. Denmark has no minimum wage either.
The people doing the deliveries for e.g. Wolt earn at minimum of 120 DKK an hour (~18,5 USD) on a scheduled shift and can often earn more, depending on how much they are willing to work. The last average I read is around 150DKK an hour (~23,30 USD) for delivery personel in that company.
The main issue with unionizing in Denmark is that it would require the companies to sign the delivery people to fixed-hour contracts (think nine-to-five), which doesn't work with the business model and isn't what most of the delivery people have expressed their wants about. Most of them enjoy the freedom and many in creative industries (e.g. musicians) use it as a way to supplement their income.
I think it is important to recognize what unionization actually means and whether or not that solves the problem, and before that; figure out what the actual problem really is.
While not wanting to sound too negative in this response, I didn’t even consider the file size, but rather the creative possibilities that opens up when one successfully breaks with an otherwise common format and merges it with a new one.
Many legal systems allow limited retribution, if it can be seen as proportional to self-defense.
That said, there's an overarching idea that one shouldn't try to "get even" by lowering oneself to the other person's level. Proportionality as a legal concept makes it legal to defend yourself, but illegal to escalate the threat.
E.g. one can use fists against fists, but if B stabs A to death, it will be hard to claim it was in self defense, since there is no obvious proof that A was looking to murder B by punching B to death.
If it is possible to refrain from violence and use the justice system to replace it (by having B press charges against A), then that ought to be a more civil outcome.
One could argue that the reason to have a legal system is so that B does not have to go around preparing to punch back, but can spend her time doing more productive things and that is how we end up with a civil society, with a high level of productivity and freedom of expression, and a minimum level of violence.
It seems like you are missing an important aspect of UBI: What level of income will it provide?
If a (perhaps more fulfilling or “fitting”) life on UBI is to rival that of say a stockbroker, UBI must provide more freedom than one can get by working in that position, while perhaps saving up for early retirement.
The income level will have to be moderate at the very least, to rival that. Since it is supported by tax revenue, it must be part of a balanced budget. This can quite easily be matched by a reasonable income, where a good amount is put into savings each month.
I agree, that this is not an option for a lot of people, as their monthly expenses won’t allow to save like that. But then that isn’t something that UBI will fix - given its “basic” nature. If all else equal, the higher the level of UBI, the higher the price level as demand increases.
I do support some models of UBI. It could help in replacing the myriad of different welfare programmes that are only about money here in Denmark, where billions of USD are either wasted or swallowed by bureaucracy each year.
However, I find it almost fraudulent how UBI is being misused as a “Trojan Horse” by some people and especially by politicians.
UBI, like most other insurance schemes, will only work if most people are net-positive contributors. This makes UBI mostly into a welfare programme - something that’s limited in its use.
But if the idea is that it’s something for everyone, most of the time, I’m hard pressed to answer how it will work on a societal basis, without the use of force.
I don’t believe that is what you argue for, so please don’t take this as a straw man argument against your point.
The Danish legislation is setup in such a way, that all electricity consumers pay a tariff to cover the guaranteed electricity prices to owners of wind farms.
Still, Denmark often sold electricity for pennies on the dollar – or literally for free – to Norway, who in turn used the energy to pump more water into their hydroelectric dams. This energy was then sold back to us, at (higher) market rates, whenever the wind died down and Denmarks needed to import electricity, due to its inability to produce enough electricity to cover its own demand.
Often, when Scandinavia is getting a lot of wind, you can even see electricity prices going below zero. In some of those cases, you can sometimes see a group of wind turbines, where some are spinning at great speeds and other are completely still. This is in order for the producers not wanting to pay to get rid of their electricity.
While it is a shame that the storage problem isn't solved yet (except in the case of our shrewd Norwegian neighbours), I don't really fancy waiting for that to happen, when other options are (or rather should be) on the table.
>> Not only are our energy prices among the highest in the world - how does 40 cents pr. kWh sound?
> That sounds like a great way to reduce carbon footprint. All renewable power is used, so every extra (marginal) kWh used comes 100% from CO² producing generation. A price high enough to affect consumer's usage will reduce the carbon footprint.
I disagree; itis a rather backwards view and a misunderstanding of how cheap and plentiful energy has made the human experience less harsh and more meaningful for billions of people.
In Denmark it means that many Danish homes are being heated with wood stoves, wood pellet boilers, natural gas or even old oil furnaces. Neither of these have any meaningful filtering and emit CO2, whereas cheaper electricity would make heat pumps and other electric heating much more meaningful.
Remember: Cheap energy is not the problem, unless the low price point is due to political legislating, not requiring the producer to pay the entire "bill", e.g. by not compensating for emitting CO2.
Vestas and other wind turbine producers have done some clever lobbying by getting legislators to buy their "cheap" power, while leaving the issue of baseline stability to somebody else.
Better how? Scientists and professors with decades of experience in this exact field, disagree[0].
Burning wood even discharges more CO2 in the atmosphere, than coal[1] and we haven't even started to talk about where all those trees must be grown to keep up with the demand of an energy policy based on solar/wind + biofuel backup, like we are planning in Denmark.
It is not a terribly good idea and it is infuriating how little science and facts matter to a political discusssion that one would think was based around those elements.
As a Dane, I am slightly offended by the dishonesty of our politicians, especially concerning our energy policy, which makes no sense.
Yes, this is a big deal, but only because of the publicity value of the decision, as the environmental impact will be negligible. But this is the root of the problem: Denmark's energy policy is almost solely about publicity!
Since the end of the 1970s, our neighbours in Sweden have consistently followed an energy policy, that deliver cheap[0] and stable energy from hydro- and nuclear power, while emitting much less CO2 than us. Check at any time of day, and I can assure you that the emmissions from our electricity consumption will be higher than in Sweden[1].
While Denmark has almost phased out coal power, we've replaced it with "biofuel"; imported wood from Brazil, Estonia and the US. This is especially neat, as a technicality in the IPCC emmissions ratings views wood as a sustainable fuel, as the forest can be replanted and the emmissions will be stored in the wood until this is cut down and burned anew.
Our strategy was described as "accounting fraud" by IPCC scientist William Moomaw and "climate fraud" by Daniel Kammen, professor at Berkeley and a former IPCC lead author and Obama advisor. Denmark's seemingly incredible track record has even fooled our population: 78% of Danes believe that our primary source of renewable energy was windpower, when this was actually just 22% of all renewable electricity generation (biomass being 68%), which accounts for 35% of total electricity consumption [2].
This is problematic to say the least: Not only are our energy prices among the highest in the world - how does 40 cents pr. kWh sound? - we aren't making any real difference. The Danish strategy has always been sold as "a job creator" and "an export adventure", but isn't that just the same type of corporate greed, now in sheeps clothing?
Danish wind turbine manufacturer, Vestas, was the primary recepient of billions of dollars in state aid, tax excemptions, etc., but every downturn resulted in layoffs, which always struck Denmark first.'
As CO2-levels have risen to a record level, we Danes keep on burning wood, straw and trash, while calling ourselves a "green leader", while our strategy has also left us wholly dependent on electricity imports from Germany, Norway and Sweden.
The inability to act sensibly is depressing and I hate how the entire issue of climate is being politized in such a way, that a civil discussion is close impossible, while lobbyists are having a field day.
So please spare me the praise of Denmark's policies. If nothing else, our deceptions are making things worse.