explaingarlic

...Are you sure you want to push money launderers more into crypto? Cause that's all you'll be achieving using this.

Good for me, I'm still holding some XMR :-)

A lot of the velocity you listed was not as quick as it seems.

Supersonic flight is a question of manufacturing processes more than anything; we could always scale engines to make more power, just that making them light while being producible to a specific degree of accuracy was difficult.

Nuclear fission was discovered in 1938 and implemented successfully in 1945. Of course nobody would have thought of it - just like how I would never have thought of a ladder if I never saw one and never had a need for one. It's a question of looking at the fundamental laws and materials of matter, finding their inner workings and theorizing more useful ways of using these inner workings. We didn't put a stupid amount of effort into nuclear fission relative to how much it changed the world - I'm willing to bet that more cost has been put into r&d for office furniture than for the nuclear bomb.

Chess is a simple game of calculation, not a sign of intelligence. It merely reflects the ability to calculate, which is the strength of scalable computers. It just so happens that we came up with computers and they work well in this space - there's no telling of things we haven't discovered because we haven't thought to implement anything to do with them.

Sure, computers can write symphonies, but they are very far away from inventing something like a symphony. Which I would describe as something close to sapiogenesis.

I maintain that intelligence won't be cracked in my lifetime, knowing that I could look silly doing so. We can't even quantify what intelligence is, let alone begin to work towards it.

If they can paint, then so can I. And it took me years to learn how to do decent stickmen!

Either way, we are not going to see intelligent computers in our lifetime, let alone elephants. Don't mean to condemn them but sapio-genesis is often oversold as being too easy. We are nowhere near being capable of ourselves, we have just learned how to process things similarly to how brains do it, at a fraction of the efficacy and ten trillion times the cost.

"Prostate with grief"

Many great sopranos quotes to go along, such as..

"Much like a child, a film has many parents".

The Windows Internals series is typically the go-to for what you're looking for. Combine with MSDN browsing to determine what you want to do and how you want to do it.

> until I realized that was their tactic to make sure you don't "steal" credit from them by working harder.

Definitely true from a office politics standpoint. And incredibly painful. Not all problems are solvable in the office and this is for sure one of them - when I was in this position, the only thing I could do was switch jobs.

He does have a point, though. The Chinese labor policy of "more" is strictly benefiting the Chinese economy.

Not that it's much of a downside for us; if you live in the west you are competing with people who don't do much outside of 9-5. We have the benefit of having the ability to apply the Chinese "work till you're dead" mindset and gaining a competitive advantage, on an individual scale.

It all comes at great human cost of course, but it's not like it's not an effective method.

Still helps to know that you have a consistent way of doing it, especially if you do it a lot.

Dunno, I got AWS CSA-P and it never got me any new interviews. Granted I stopped looking and only took interviews from people that looked for me actively.