First off, it's just hard. Sorry you have to go through it.
What's worked unfailingly for me for the 40+ years since I became an adult was always having long term habits that moved my life forward. I had no guidance on the big stuff, so from about age 12 I methodically taught myself about programming, sculpting a career, investment, running a business, running a household, being funny, being a man, etc. All years-long efforts. (If I had to do it all again I'd replace one of those with a martial art.)
So I had something to work on instead of lapsing into depression during very dark times. If you met me the last thing you would imagine is that chicks dig me, but they do. I'm not good looking by any standards. But building these skills created a person that people know can get things done at a pretty high level. People like a confident dude, and that will probably serve you much better than spending an ungodly amount of time on Hinge.
don't thinkpads from the similar time go for the same amount of money? seems like an alright price for a machine of that vintage, although thinkpad is obviously superior here since it would always be able to run linux or windows (well that one is not guaranteed) without much, if any, trouble
Not the OP, but I have an M1 MBA and it handles light "coding" stuff quite well, though haven't tried VSCode+Zoom+bunch of other stuff, as my work laptop is a M1 MBP.
Please take this question at face value. I tend to be slightly pro defense department in this context, but it is not a strongly held belief.
What I have known is that since its very inception, Google has been doing massive amounts of business with the war department. What makes this particular contract different? I really am trying to understand why these sentiments now.
It's a clear enough moral issue that whichever side of it you end up on is likely to have life-shaping consequences 5 or 10 years down the line. It's predictable that there will be domestic or international conflict with a high cost in lives and political coherence over that timescale, and being someone who 'was in AI' at a government scale vendor is qualitatively different from being a database admin o font designer or UX specialist.
Substantively, individual employees of these firms may have little or no actual impact on this. But AI is ubiquitous enough and disruptive enough that being professionally connected with it at a time of great geopolitical instability has the potential to be a very very bad look later.
No, because 'military contractor' is vague and people don't associate logistics or mapping info with death directly and assign responsibility to some generic person in uniform. 'AI systems that hunt down and kill you' is the sort of sci-fi nightmare people relate to personally.
This reads like an AI response to me. Would you elaborate? I can see no reason to believe it would achieve stability based on many of the statements in this issue.
Chiming in: indeed, the response is very dry, and raises suspicion. It states the obvious facts and then makes a boring statement, lacking any nuance of the conversation. It is not argumentative in the very least.
Time has been spend, yes. But the topic at hand is after so much time the conclusion to abandon this path is justified.
reply