EatATaco

It's click bait. Using exponents are not as eye catching.

He warned about parties themselves.

Maybe the system is set up to limit the power of protest voting?

Not everything is some conspiracy to keep you down. The people who wrote the constitution just weren't perfect and had to make political compromises, which resulted in an imperfect system.

Again, I'm curious as to what kind of interviews you are running if you aren't catching people who claim to have experience in something, but have only basically crammed online for (at best) a few weeks between an interview request and actual interview. I feel like if someone had tried to become an expert in the field during such a short time, it would be painfully obvious, unless they were an Olympic level bullshitter. Also, if you claim to have experience in something, and I ask about that experience, and you make it up, that is still lying.

I find working with AI to help me understand way better.

Using Linux as an example. If I search for "give me the size of each subdirectory in the current directory" the stack overflow answer will be "just type du -h --max-depth=1" so you copy and paste it and, voila!, it's exactly what you want. Except I have no idea what any of it means.

However, I ask chatgpt, and it will explain that du means disk usage, -h gives a human readable form, and --max-depth=1 will only go down 1 level, without showing all of the subdirectories.

So now I've learned something.

Additionally, with coding, it's a lot like rubber duck debugging for me. Just formulating my question will often lead to an answer, or trying to explain what went wrong with the AI solution helps me get to the proper answer.

And doesn't insult you, and gives you an answer far more tailored to your issue.

I've been working in tech since 2000 and have been in a hiring position since ~2008. I've done very well for myself, and continue to do well, and I've never had to lie. I've always just treated most of the down page requirements as "nice to have" or "have something similar" rather than hard requirements, and have always been upfront about it in interviews about the actual amount of experience I've had in these things. What kind of interviews are you running where you aren't asking about the requirements for the job? One of my main goals in interviews is to discuss what the candidate has worked on so I know how well it fits into what we're doing.

I do agree that if you do the job well, no one is going to ask questions. But if looks like you've lied to get the job, it makes it pretty easy decision to fire you if things are going poorly.

It’s still very true that the media deserves it,

The article is calling it out, while the poster is claiming that it isn't calling it out. It's definitely not deserved here, and they are just being mindlessly outraged. It's the exact same shit I see from dumbass trump supporters: the facts don't matter, only the narrative.

“we don’t see the world as it is; we see the world as we are.”

Yeah, but making a thoughtful post about the article actually requires reading it. Just being outraged at the media is much easier intellectually. Bonus points because it's popular here on Lemmy.

I assume the POTUS, who is the source of all classification, could have always just given clearance to whomever they wanted. I doubt the scotus ruling has anything to do with this.

I've been to msg hundreds of times over the past 30 years and can't remember a time that I noted it smelled bad. Like weed, definitely, but not bad.