I don't believe there are visa requirements between EU countries, you might want to fix that (maybe skip the EU countries for EU citizen, or give 100%?)
Great point. I'm currently giving it the same weight as other bilateral agreements (e.g. Chile and Australia) but it should be a different category. Thank you!
I've interviewed ~5 times in the last year...did not receive any business cards or email addresses. The recruiter/HR person actually denied my request for their email address when I asked for it in order to send a note on more than one occasion.
I used to think like you until I met a coworker. He could not code to save his life, nobody in the team liked working with him. Until one day we had a boring data entry task. He could do it for hours at a time, and barely made any mistake. This experience taught me something.
To each his own I guess. Maybe that person is most comfortable in a semi- auto pilot mode. I have noticed that some people are very much averse to prolonged thinking / problem solving / creative work. These are the kinds of people, who, if stuck in a problem, go to their friends and family for advise and solve their problems. They usually have a lot of people / socializing / networking skills.
I myself am an introvert and love to sit by myself and think of solutions for problems, be it work / life related. I am very bad at networking and usually go to a very very small set of people to discuss any problems I am facing, that I am unable to solve myself.
I don’t think those things are mutually exclusive. I love to sit and think in a problem. I also love to turn off my brain completely and solve sudoku for hours on end while my mind is elsewhere.
That's really interesting, about the sudoku thing. I love to do those puzzles but I go full into the stuff and can't think anything else while solving for them.
People have their competencies which may not often be evident.
I do still think that, in the hyper competitive corporate world today, such kinds of people will get shafted regularly until they realize themselves what their great skills are and build on them.
Amazingly it's hard to find a good link on this topic.
Anyway it's from some study years ago that the most productive people are 10 times more productive than the least productive people. These are called 10x-ers (assuming they exist).
0.1xer is a play on that to talk to the least productive people in a team.
There is no need to spend time on the hardware either, but OP wanted to learn something.
For those who might be interested here is my firmware project: https://github.com/marcv81/umk. I like to think it's more approachable than QMK, at the cost of features.
"That again, they respond to stimuli but don't feel pain like an animal."
I don't feel this is a valid argument. We only really know how pain feels to us, but we can guess it also applies to other humans, animals, etc. That we cannot imagine how it feels to respond to negative stimuli as a plant should not invalidate the possibility that it is unpleasant.
It seems vanishingly unlikely that a plant could experience pain. To the best of our knowledge, you need a brain of some sort to experience anything. Even that may not be sufficient: an unconscious human doesn't appear to experience pain.
You could argue that plants may have some unknown structure that allows them to experience pain or other phenomena, but that's no very useful. You could argue the same about rocks. It's impossible to prove a negative.
A robot can be designed to respond to stimuli. For instance, an advanced robotic vacuum cleaner moves away when it hits an object that was not supposed to be there, or move away from a source of heat or from water. In what sense are these responses different from the response of a plant or an insect?
Do you think you contributed to the conversation or that anyone might have been missing part of the picture but you pointing out that black swans are a literal thing that are not uncommon unlike fairies that don’t exist or “black swans” (like “bull runs”) that are by definition extremely rare?
I once said “there’s no such thing as a bull run” in some context with a group of friends. Do you think you would have chimed in to say that there’s a big one in Madrid every year?
Most manholes are round because that is the most practical shape such that the cover cannot fall in. There are actually other shapes, but they are usually hinged and most costly.
I've never thought about it, but a circle of the correct size has no less reason to not fall in than say a square or triangle of the appropriate size. I.e. if it's smaller than the hole, it'll most likely fall in.
My theory: They're heavy, so making it a circle at least eliminates the need to "align" it when putting it back. You can basically just drag it using a hook and it'll slot itself into place.
But manhole covers are always bigger than the hole. Otherwise, they'd fall in at installation and the problem would be immediately obvious.
The point here is more that a circle has the same diameter regardless of orientation. There's no way to rotate it to make it fit through a hole it couldn't before, like you can do with a rectangle.
> In geometry, Prince Rupert's cube (named after Prince Rupert of the Rhine) is the largest cube that can pass through a hole cut through a unit cube, i.e. through a cube whose sides have length 1, without splitting the cube into two pieces. Its side length is approximately 6% larger than that of the unit cube through which it passes. The problem of finding the largest square that lies entirely within a unit cube is closely related, and has the same solution.
Man hole covers aren't flat discs nor thin cylinders, but are truncated cones. The diameter of the bottom of the cover is smaller than the top. There is no way for a cone to fall through an opening smaller than the widest diameter end.
