• 11 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 24th, 2024

help-circle





  • lukstru@lemmy.worldtoJobs@lemmy.worldSorry, what?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    I get that it’s annoying to have a lot of (obviously) under qualified applications, and someone has to go through them. I just don’t think it’s possible to solve this problem without being unfair to at least some applicants.

    More context

    I was part of a hiring committee for a professor job at an European university last year. The job description was clear enough that you got the vibe “this is a high profile job. Only apply if you think you really are high profile for a European university.”

    And we got soooo many trash applications, we rejected more than 90% in the first screening. Some obvious ones, and some less obvious ones. The obvious ones were the most annoying, because wtf is that application. One that will always stay in my mind is the application of an already established professor, which consisted only of a CV that looked like a 3 year old glued it together and someone replicated that in Power Point in 2003. I was so confused about this application, because how tf did this person think this was enough? They’re an established professor! They really should know how applications work.

    So yeah, I get that there are a lot of annoying applications coming in that feel like a waste of time for everyone. Asking money to apply will not help tho.

    Maybe hire someone to help with the applications…? No wait, then you’d have to go through even more applications. /s










  • It looks like it is one, but dmidecode doesn’t show it.

    # sudo dmidecode --type slot           
    # dmidecode 3.4
    Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs.
    SMBIOS 3.0.0 present.
    
    Handle 0x001C, DMI type 9, 17 bytes
    System Slot Information
            Designation: J6B2
            Type: x16 PCI Express
            Current Usage: Available
            Length: Long
            ID: 1
            Characteristics:
                    3.3 V is provided
                    Opening is shared
                    PME signal is supported
            Bus Address: 0000:ff:10.0
    
    Handle 0x001D, DMI type 9, 17 bytes
    System Slot Information
            Designation: J6B1
            Type: x1 PCI Express
            Current Usage: Available
            Length: Short
            ID: 2
            Characteristics:
                    3.3 V is provided
                    Opening is shared
                    PME signal is supported
            Bus Address: 0000:ff:1c.4
    
    Handle 0x001E, DMI type 9, 17 bytes
    System Slot Information
            Designation: J6D1
            Type: x4 PCI Express
            Current Usage: Available
            Length: Long
            ID: 3
            Characteristics:
                    3.3 V is provided
                    Opening is shared
                    PME signal is supported
            Bus Address: 0000:ff:1d.0
    
    Handle 0x001F, DMI type 9, 17 bytes
    System Slot Information
            Designation: J7B1
            Type: x1 PCI Express
            Current Usage: Available
            Length: Short
            ID: 4
            Characteristics:
                    3.3 V is provided
                    Opening is shared
                    PME signal is supported
            Bus Address: 0000:ff:1c.5
    
    
    Wrong DMI structures length: 3135 bytes announced, structures occupy 3136 bytes.
    






  • It matters as soon as a requirement change comes in and you have to change something. Writing a dirty ass incomprehensible, but working piece of code is ok, as long as no one touches it again.

    But as soon as code has to be reworked, worked on together by multiple people, or you just want to understand what you did 2 weeks earlier, code readability becomes important.

    I like Uncle Bobs Clean Code (with a grain of salt) for a general idea of what such an approach to make code readable could look like. However, it is controversial and if overdone, can achieve the opposite. I like it as a starting point though.


  • Yep, that’s what it usually boils down to. However, I think a slight approach shift for basic materials could be useful, where introductory books / papers / … write out formulas. That makes it easier to understand the basic concepts before moving onto the more complex stuff. It should be easy to create such works, as they are usually created digitally, and autocomplete is available. Students can and will abbreviate those written outs words by themselves (after all, writing is annoying), but IMO reading comprehension is the key part that can be improved.

    Also, when doing long formulas that you want to eliminate members of, writing stuff out can be a nightmare.


  • I recently held a science slam about this topic! It’s a mix of the first computer scientists being mathematicians, who love their abbreviations, and limited screen size, memory and file size. It’s a trend in computing that has been well justified in the past, but has been making it harder for people to work together. And the need to use abbreviations has completely gone with the age of auto completion and language servers.