tomcat27

This sounds like useful advice. Thank you.

I just can't think well on interesting problems while someone's talking to someone behind, someone at my face at the cubicle trying to hit a conversation. Hence, WFH.

Don't like team because finding good team 10xs everything but bad team 1/10xs everything.

It's way more likely the team is a misfit in real world unless of course there are no hiring constraints due to elitism.

Don't like to be a contractor.

> What companies want is team players who are often fun, light and friendly, actively work to build trust with a team through socialization, promote good practices and patterns and don't begrudge the fact that a portion of their day is to be spent in meetings, reviewing others' code and generally communicating.

It seems ok for a company to seek these from their engineers. I think, I want these too. I just don't like forced standups and sync up meetings. If someone did something cool and want to pull me aside to show? I'm all in. If someone wants help on something, I'll be there..

but it's just that the way things are managed is just dull.

let's do a standup meeting for 15mins where people explain - what they did yesterday - what they will do today - what are impediments

I propose an idea and the TL arbitrarily pulls off a blog post reference to shut down by saying "there's no business value".

umm. effing nonsense.

Firing over this very un-googly

I think it's fair to expect interviewee to solve 2 LC mediums in 45 mins given by the candidate. That's the current FAANG expectation. If a bad candidate is too costly for a company, so are a bad company too costly for a candidate.

People on internet seek engagement else why eve write a blog. Twitter is indisputably better for engagement.

They are not banks. They are forex traders.

It's not in the spirit of decentralization to stop withdrawals

I just don't understand why Apple Music search is so bad. Sometimes only exact match returns albums. It's so bad that appending "Apple Music" in google works better.

The problem is magic doesn't happen when people put jury duty on their CV

Not sure how that slipped. Sorry.

> You might mean 4 "doublings"

Rate of change: Enrollment increased by 4 times. Population increased by 100 times.

> How do you double elite universities?

Doubling elite universities: I mean more outreach from let's say T10 with next 10-20. This doesn't happen.

Ex: Top 5 won't cite papers written by someone in the middle. It happens but that's quite rare.

Ex: Faculty recruitment does not propagates from bottom ranking institution to top ranking institution. It's super rare.

Ex: Research collaborations are very clubby.

> It's more like we have an eliteness gradient (T10, T20, etc...) and the masses together decide what's "elite enough".

Masses opinion doesn't count. Eliteness is determined by elite. Consider an elite club exists at the beginning. Every 5 years new members are inducted into the elite club. Their opinion matters way more than everyone's simply because they are elite.

In most departments, the state of the art is a qualitative measurement. Something is great because a bunch of great people think it's great. There isn't a better approach anyway. But that comes with bad biases.

Ex: It's rare to have a Supreme Court justice coming from outside Harvard and Yale.

Ex: Some departments in Harvard would never hire someone as faculty just because they aren't from Harvard, Yale or a couple of other places.