sunjieming's comments

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting

Yeah, it's definitely a head-scratcher. I wonder how often unapproved people make it in. Seems like a major security risk to have someone unapproved in the room with that many high-level government leaders from multiple countries.

I'm wondering if they were given a pass by another approved news agency or something along those lines.

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: Looking for work is a full time job

We're seeing a flood of fake AI generated job applications basically DDOSing our hiring funnel. Not sure how widespread it is but it has become enormously frustrating to sift the complete garbage from the good resumes. I'm sure a lot of good people have been accidentally filtered out

It's rough out there right now. Also, not even sure what the benefit or angle is for spamming fake job applications. State actors trying to sabotage?

Edit: We can tell that some of the applications are fake because we have people fail background screenings and often the attached LinkedIn profile is using AI generated images and job histories that don't add up.

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: The Open Source Computer Science Degree

Yeah, someone like that would be perfect. I personally am self taught and didn't finish my CS degree and every few years I look around for an option like this. I'm an experienced senior dev and the opportunity cost of finishing my degree is always just way too high relative to any value it would actually provide for my career. I wish something like this existed.

The degree doesn't matter in most of tech but if I ever wanted to work for the government or military I'd be automatically disqualified for not having a degree despite having the ability. The tech interview process that many people deride actually provides the opportunity to get a great tech job if you just simply know the material. It's been a huge advantage for me

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: The Open Source Computer Science Degree

I've heard it put this way: Why would Stanford reject 95% of the people who want to pay them full tuition for the education?

I think Peter Thiel's answer is correct - The value of the education is similar to a night club's. It's about how long the line is outside of the club that determines how desirable it is.

It's not only the knowledge that people are paying for. It's the branding and the filtering that provides most of the value. So Stanford/MIT granting degrees to anyone that studies open source material will never happen because that dillution destroys most of the value proposition

Edit: Another point: what other business would not seek to dramatically increase supply of their product if they could only sell their extremely expensive product to <5% of the willing buyers? Any other business would invest significantly in increasing their production capacity. But with universities if they increase their capacity then the actual value they provide diminishes. Stanford is no longer Stanford if they have 900k students

Edit 2: My hope is that a university without enormous branding/filtering risk (Like WGU) could implement a model like this. Or a tech co could spin up a small attached accredited university that exclusively focuses on granting degrees to async learners. Like Amazon expanding their certifications they provide to granting an actual BS in CS if the student passes a bunch of exams.

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

Whenever there's information asymmetry that financially benefits one party you have to be cautious. It's been shocking how many times people I know have sought second opinions on recommended dental work only to be given a completely different recommended treatment that's thousands of dollars cheaper.

Example from a friend: Dentist 1 - you need ten fillings today! Dentist 2 - You have a few risk spots but let's just keep an eye on it.

Went with the second recommendation and didn't have any issues and that was a decade ago.

sunjieming | 1 year ago | on: ESA report shows unsustainable levels of orbital debris

According to NASA: If the debris is <600km the orbit decays within a few years. >800k can take centuries and geostationary objects on the high end (~36000km) can take thousands of years.

Most of the debris is in LEO so it could take decades to centuries for the debris to clear out

sunjieming | 7 years ago | on: Stealing the Enemy's Urban Advantage: The Battle of Sadr City

I like to think that a strong military creates security which allows innovation to increase. The US is able to produce and innovate at such a high level because we're kept stable by a strong military.

Battles like this ideally help us learn more efficient and effective tactics and strategies that can be used in future conflicts.

It's a necessary evil but I sincerely believe we're all better off because of these investments. Maybe someday we'll have world peace but for now, we're a violent species. Thank goodness the liberal democracies of the world have the dominant militaries.

page 1