I've also experienced this elsewhere. TIAA was essentially sending me marketing emails I couldn't unsubscribe from. My financial manager with sympathetic and communicated my frustration to the business, but I don't believe it lead to any changes. As a result I have marked my emails from TIAA as spam, which now means email is not a reliable source of information from them, and so I unsubscribed from all email communication and instead receive paper mail. Sad.
I can name others using this pattern. Very frustrating. It's a lot of work to sever these relationships. I guess they know this and so think they can get away with it.
I recently came across the idea of Universal Basic Capital (UBC): "granting every person a meaningful ownership stake in productive assets from birth." UBC would be enormously difficult to implement, as well as have its own weaknesses. It doesn't seem realistic, but introduces a new idea into the conversation.
Using the Gemini CLI the first thing I tried to do was "Create GEMINI.md files to customize your interactions with Gemini." The command ran for about a minute before receiving a too many requests error.
"Inspired by recent cellular neurobiological evidence linking neocortical pyramidal cells to distinct mental states, this work shows how models (e.g., transformers) can emulate high-level perceptual processing and awake thought (imagination) states to pre-select relevant information before applying attention."
"This model works by pre-selecting relevant information and identifying the most salient parts of it before applying its full attention to it."
This question came up on Soft Skills Engineering[1]. To cut through the noise it's more important to have a blog or a project you contribute to which you can point to. And then yes, whiteboard type of questions which unfortunately are not reflective of day to day work.
I can't help but wonder whether the problem is subjective, to each person and what they need to accomplish at the time. What is cognitive load and indirection to one at one time is a simple abstraction to another at another time.
And so I wonder if a solution to this is for editors to be able to represent the code differently, depending on what the person's needs are at the time.
One of my favorite pieces I've read. I keep revisiting it throughout the years. I feel it deserves to be shared again. It is perhaps even more moving and relevant today.
I've also experienced this elsewhere. TIAA was essentially sending me marketing emails I couldn't unsubscribe from. My financial manager with sympathetic and communicated my frustration to the business, but I don't believe it lead to any changes. As a result I have marked my emails from TIAA as spam, which now means email is not a reliable source of information from them, and so I unsubscribed from all email communication and instead receive paper mail. Sad.
I can name others using this pattern. Very frustrating. It's a lot of work to sever these relationships. I guess they know this and so think they can get away with it.