I wonder why it is necessary to mention "Indians that are scamming" him as if scamming is something only Indians do? Should I be careful only when dealing with Indian consultants and presume others won't lie or cheat?
Probably because Indians are the ones that are leaders in scamming? Also, if you paid attention, I've mentioned the initial Python dev was an honest Indian, he did his job within terms of contract. The data scientist, which in this case was a Canadian, is solely at fault for not disclosing full scale to the Indian one.
You really seem to have a way with words where, while the point of your original premise (i.e. lack of requirements, technical competence) is valid you have managed to bury that under completely unrelated negative and racist stereotyping.
>as if [bad thing] is something only [group] do?
This is such a nonsense statement and it comes up everytime someone describes someones nationality in correlation with something awful.
Honest question, when you read the line "[...]Chinese that are good at math [...]" do you read that all Chinese people are math-wizards? Because that is not what it says.
What about "[...] black people that are fast runners [...]"?
all 3 examples, including the one that turned on your torch of virtue, describes a sub-set of a group, the primary attribute of said group and nothing more.
If anything the implication that the guy you were replied to is somehow biased and "racist" against the absolute-plague-tier of disproportional scammers coming out of India is based on nothing but your inability to differentiate between "broadspectrum-racism" and "critism of a subset of a group"
This is a very charitable reading of the comment, and the examples stated seem somewhat unrelated.
A closer analogy will be: "He was lost in New York City. Later, he cursed at all the Blacks who robbed him." Or "He had an intense negotiation with the financiers. He later cursed at all the Jews who were scamming him."
As you may note, the term "jews" or "blacks" or "Indians" (in the original comment) is not merely stated as an adjective to describe the individuals, rather it is used in pejorative sense to denote a cultural trait within the group that makes them act in a particular manner. A child comment by the original poster makes his prejudice quite clear: "Probably because Indians are the ones that are leaders in scamming? "
I get your whole point about talking about individual, subset, and group, but it looks like just a defence for calling Indians "world leaders in scamming.", rather than some data based, dispassionate description of the situation.
You have to resort to using analogies when the actual sentence in question transfers very well in my examples?
I'm making extreme examples out of the sentence, but putting something 'awesome' with it. Being good at math / Fast runners etc - to make the point very concise and on point.
Had i run with the theme and went "White people who shoots up schools [...]" or "Black people who sell crack cocaine" you would have likely missed the point entirely because I'm using negative-stereotypes.
That the child-comment elaborates his thoughts into racist ramblings is frankly irrelevant to me. The guy is clearly both illiterate, insensitive and likely in the silly end of the bell curve.
>That the child-comment elaborates his thoughts into racist ramblings is frankly irrelevant to me
It should not be. We need to call these people out and put a stop to such behaviour.
Coming to your comments; "positive stereotypes" just earn a gentle laugh while "negative stereotypes" lead to racist behaviour with a disproportionate impact on the real world. They are not the same.
Yes, because whether he is a racist or not is not relevant to the point i was making.
> We [...]
We, do not need to do anything. But go ahead, engage him, feed him with the social interaction the rest of us deprive him of - because he is a shitty person.
Waste your time all you want.
> Coming to your comments; "positive stereotypes" just earn a gentle laugh while "negative stereotypes" lead to racist behaviour with a disproportionate impact on the real world. They are not the same.
Predictable that you are missing the point entirely. Please reread the exchange, one line at a time. Else you might think and label me as a racist because you have put up a communication barrier and absolutely refuse to understand my original point.
If the money required "to design real (general purpose) multicore processors that deliver orders of magnitude better performance than what we have today" is in low millions of dollars and technical challenge isn't too daunting, why haven't VCs invested in such ventures?
I made one for myself a while ago: https://github.com/ImedAdel/arkiv, it just tries to look for an archived version or sends you to a page to build to archive the website.
It doesn't come off as snobby or even pretentious, merely facile. The author has publications in distributed systems in reputed journals, is currently researching and teaching on distributed systems, and has worked with the Scala community for quite some time so at the very least she is competent and knows the subject.
Dismissing content because it's written in markdown without providing good reasons, such as quality of content or specifically how the presentation hinders proper communication is indeed quite lazy. If you want people to take you seriously, please try to be more precise in your criticism.
> Brainwash them regularly by communicating how great your company is, how big its mission is, and how important their contribution is.
A few year ago a friend was working as a consultant for Disneyland mentioned about how little Disneyland would pay its lowest rung employees who kept the place running. Instead the workers were fed corporate bullshit about how lucky they were to work at the "happiest place in the world."
Perhaps being educated or skilled does not reduce one's susceptibility to psychological manipulation.
Brainwash them regularly by communicating how great your company is, how big its mission is, and how important their contribution is.
It works even better in the world of classified programs because, due to compartmentalization of information, the engineers don't know much about the overall project or what anybody else is doing. But they can always be sure their contributions are important...to management's bonuses.
As I'm practicing consulting cases right now for an MBB interview, my standard question to reducing company costs is: can we reduce labor costs by lowering their wage? Ah, they're unionized. Ok, let's look at another cost saving strategy that does not involve labor.
The first time I learned this I was shocked that this is a standard question in case practice for strategy/implementation consultants. Now I'm happy that I know this is how strategy/implementation consultants think. It kind of feels like learning to defend against economic exploits by coming up with them yourself (a similar thing occurs with security when one learns ethical hacking).
There’s no standard question to cut labor cost by X%. One of the things in the case interview is how structured you approach problems. If that problem turns out to be how to reduce cost, one possible approach is to go over all the major costs and ask if/how you could reduce those.
Yes: For labor the potential answer could be (1) paying people less ($/hr) and/or (2) doing the same work with less people (automation, lean). Exploring the option does not mean it’s a desired path. (Eg perhaps the company in the case is already below market wages and has a retention problem)
It does not work on people who are not intellectually challenged (that is, take a moment to think - many low rung people cannot afford one) if the culture does not value this kind of conformity.
(Such as not Asia.)
The motivation section of the documentation covers this in detail [1].
From what I understand, the key points are:
1. The author claims that various libraries in Python (Scipy, Pandas, etc.) have a large amount of duplicated code and overlap, if you look deeply in the code. Having one library with a holistic design prevents this overlap and allows for easier optimisation.
2. He further claims that because "numerical computing is built atop of a small amount of abstract number types (e.g. real and complex), then derives a fat set of advanced numerical operations for various fields", unlike systems programming, holism, such as in OWL, is preferable to reductionism.
edit: grammar