zmb_

During my academic career I worked at a top German research university and advised multiple of these projects. On the surface it’s a good deal for everyone: the professor gets increased publication and graduate counts without having to pay for it, the company gets a top student working on their research problem very cheaply, and the student gets a PhD, an employment contract, and often a visa.

The reality was unfortunately often not so great. What would happened is that the student would get 3-4 year contract with 50% allocation to the PhD research in addition to normal employment duties. That is not enough to graduate if the professor has high standards.

As a result, the student would transition to full time employment after the 3-4 years, try to work on research in the evenings, and give up after some time. Or they would graduate with a very low quality degree (I saw students graduate with a 0 or 1 publications and a very thin dissertation) that has practically no value to anyone beyond providing the student with a Dr. title.

In the end I was actively advising students against it, and to just go into industry with a masters degree or find a fully academy funded PhD position if they are serious about research.

Intel does not have their own version of this machine. This ASML machine is a component in a very large system of machines from many manufacturers that runs wafers automatically from machine to machine until a month later a chip comes out the other end. That system is “18A”. Intel designs, builds and operates that system. Intel does not make the machines, they buy them and figure out how to configure and operate them as a part of the system.

A black friend of mine did exactly this, asked for a permission to get a pen from his pocket. The cop laughed “sure” and the moment he put his hand inside his pocket they jumped him and arrested him.

It’s effectively the company saying that they believe the shareholders can get a better return by investing that money elsewhere. So when a company starts doing major buybacks it’s a signal that they have reached an inflection point.

You can thank Microsoft for that. Intel architects in fact did not want to waste area on an NPU. That caused Microsoft to launch their AI-whatever branded PCs with Qualcomm who were happy to throw in whatever Microsoft wanted to get to be the launch partner. After than Intel had to follow suit to make Microsoft happy.

> we have to be honest that there is no unquestionable source of meaning in life

Think about what you would like to remain in the world after you are gone. Then think how you can connect with and advance those things, and act accordingly in your life. To me this has been a reliable way to find meaning in life. But obviously I don’t claim this is unquestionable or works for everyone.

In the automotive industry, pretty much the whole point of standards like cybersecurity (ISO21434) and functional safety (ISO26262) is to let the manufacturer claim in court that they followed “modern best practices” and therefore are not liable when something goes wrong.

It is really incredible how Apple has obviously broken and buggy UX in many primary use cases on their devices, and fail to fix it for generations.

The iPad is particularly bad in this respect. For a decade it would not support the most obvious use case for a device like this: Have it in portrait mode like a notebook, show a video or book app on the top half and notes app on the bottom half. A use case that was solved by the original Macintosh. The most infuriating thing was that you could split the vertical screen into two useless, thing vertical strips---a configuration I have never seen any use case for. Even today now that there is some more configurability and you can vaguely put two apps in this configuration, there is still massive wasted space on the sides and the apps overlap.

The Human Brain Project comes to mind.

Following the definition from the article, armed forces seems like a complicated system, not a complex one. There is a structured, repeatable solution for armed forces. It does not exhibit the hallmark characteristics of complex systems listed in the article like emergent behaviors.

The article is about persuading your peers and your management to get what you need, not about persuading your direct reports to do their tasks.

It was a life-defining piece of software for me too. As a teenager I found a server called “REALbasic Cafe” that inspired and helped me go from knowing next to nothing about programming to making my first money from shareware as a high school kid.

To this day I’m grateful I stumbled across the Hotline software and the server.

As someone frustrated in a team of 10+ that is struggling to ship even seemingly trivial things due to processes and overheads and inefficiencies, I would really appreciate some insights on how do you organize the work to allow a single developer to achieve this.

How do you communicate with the rest of the organization? What is the lifecycle and release process like? Do you write requirements and specs for others (like validation or integration) to base their work on? Basically, what does the day to day work look like?

They mentioned during the presentation that they need the new display controller on the M4 to drive the new dual panel display.