Vanth

Do you just do CAD though? Our Mech Es do a lot in CAD but not solely. Even our drafters do a lot of things not in CAD. If anyone ever asked me what I do for work, “CAD” would not be my answer.

I categorize it as a tool, not a job. And personally, I would find a job that is, say, 75% or more CAD to be boring as hell.

The two nuclear developmemts I’m watching closest are the test molten salt reactor in Oak Ridge, TN and just recently heard about a new permit to build one for Abilene Christian University in Texas.

I was at my company’s booth at a career fair earlier this week and it felt like every other student was looking for an internship in “machine learning”. When I asked follow up questions about what sort of experience they’d had or projects done or what they wanted to do with it in their career, crickets.

To be fair, 2nd most popular was “CAD” which is also not a job.

My extremely progressive by American farmer standards uncle, who has driven a Prius for non-farm travel for over a decade, would probably stare at this article silently, turn, and walk out to the barn to continue working. Just about the harshest response that man ever gives.

Ah, but Tesla is really an AI company that happens to sell cars.

• 🪄Musk as he waves away the auditors

Bold assumption that someone has written good, comprehensive checklists. Sounds possible if not likely that they’re underpaid and under supported too.

The report cites inexperienced workforce, exacerbated by the limited pool to hire from in New Orleans and the non-competitive wages Boeing offers compared to other aerospace companies. Mobile and Huntsville are right there. Lol, pony up, Boeing.

And the report mentions operators are given work instructions that lack detail and require the operator to go diving through multiple levels of specifications and historical records to understand what to do. This speaks to inadequate manufacturing engineers and processes, who are putting out the inadequate work instructions. So I’m assuming the non-competitive pay and retention problems apply to their engineers too, not just the hourly operators and mechanics.

Work for Boeing for bad pay and to see this shit in the news? Or hop over to Mobile, AL to work for Airbus at a better wage on a popular commercial plane with good reliability and a good reputation. Decisions, decisions.

I would think. And if that proof exists, it will come up at the appropriate time during legal proceedings. I’m skeptical there is any.

I guess they could call the entire existence of GARM to be collusion; companies banding together to “punish” companies who don’t follow their guidelines. But X is (was?) a voluntary member of GARM, so it seems that would be a difficult argument for them to make without implicating themselves too.

I guess reddit was feeding me all those ads out of the kindness of their hearts and took no money for hosting them. “Altruistic”, lol.

I had to skim quite a few down the search results to find an article that described what it meant by suing for “illegal boycott” in more detail.

https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/elon-musk-x-sues-advertisers-garm-boycott-1236097110/

X’s lawsuit alleged that the advertisers’ “boycott” violated Section 1 the U.S.’s Sherman Act antitrust law, which broadly prohibits agreements among distinct actors that unreasonably restrain trade, “by withholding purchases of digital advertising from Twitter.”

“The conduct of Defendants and their co-conspirators alleged herein is per se illegal, or, in the alternative, illegal under the Rule of Reason or ‘quick look’ analytical framework,” the X lawsuit said. “There are no procompetitive effects of the group boycott, which was not reasonably related to, or reasonably necessary for, any procompetitive objectives of the GARM Brand Safety Standards.”

The “unlawful conduct” alleged by X is the subject of “an active investigation” by the House of Representatives’ Committee on the Judiciary, the lawsuit said. The committee’s interim report issued on July 10 concluded that, “The extent to which GARM has organized its trade association and coordinates actions that rob consumers of choices is likely illegal under the antitrust laws and threatens fundamental American freedoms. The information uncovered to date of WFA and GARM’s collusive conduct to demonetize disfavored content is alarming.”

Boss is great, one of the best I’ve ever worked for and is fine with me working remote. Boss x 2 could just as soon not exist; he doesn’t help me but nor does he get in my way, and surprisingly the one pushing hardest for return to office. Boss x 3, really not a fan, if I didn’t have a couple layers of buffer between us, he might be enough to send me looking for a different job. 3 gets on return to office kicks, but he usually loses interest quickly.

And if I didn’t need a salary and health insurance, I wouldn’t work any job. This one isn’t terrible, relative to what else I’ve done and could do.

I see my boss in person once per quarter. I routinely use her boss’s office because I haven’t seen him in about a year. And I’ve never seen his boss despite him having an office and executive parking spot.

I’ve been asked a half dozen times to come into the office more often but it’s been super easy to deflect by praising them for how effective they are while fully remote. Either they buy my BS or they’re wise enough to see their hypocrisy and drop the topic.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Final thought: When you pair this practice with the ongoing conversation around the legality of women seeking divorce without their husband’s consent, you have a terrifying and consistently deadly situation.

Louder for anyone in the back in the US thinking it doesn’t sound so bad when Republicans like Josh Hawley and JD Vance call for an end to no-fault divorces.

That’s right, one of our VP candidates wants to disallow people from divorcing their abusive partners without jumping through hoops that will take months if not years, and leaves them susceptible to their abusive partner, now even angrier than before that the victim would dare try to leave.

I also wonder if the algorithm is being used to override the victim.

Like if she asked for help, if she didn’t want to go home and wanted to go to a shelter and get a restraining order. But they said, “low risk, nope, no resources for you”. Depending on her situation, home to her abuser may have been her only option then. In which case, this is a level of horror the article didn’t cover. The article really doesn’t explain how the risk level output by the algorithm is used. I’m having a difficult time with this article too.

One Los Angeles Times investigation found that Calmara couldn’t even discern inanimate objects and failed to identify “textbook images” of STIs.

So this app works by sending it photos of your junk and it tells you if you have an STI or not. And I assume one has to submit photos in order to get matched with others in order to “weed out” people. No privacy concerns there, nope.

Huh, I took it more as

Trump broke platform rules -> Trump punished with restrictions

Other politicians didn’t break rules -> no restrictions

… Fear of public perception and loss of advertising revenue …

Trump restrictions lifted -> now it’s “fair” for Trump to do whatever he likes on Facebook and be treated the same as politicians who don’t break platform rules

It only makes sense when optimizing for ad revenue and there we go, I just answered my own question. Let’s not pretend this is about actual fairness or objectivity on Facebook’s part.

That number is wild to me. If it includes Instagram and Whatsapp, I would believe it. But if it’s active Facebook users alone, I am in an anomalous facebook-free social bubble.

I’m doing quite well today, thanks for asking. And how are you?