If you can’t code, you’ll be like a mathematician or statistician who can’t do basic math because they have tools that can do it for them. We don’t tell kids they don’t need to know how to do basic math operations because they have Excel and calculators.
To me placing the join predicates immediately after the tables is more readable as I don’t have to switch between looking at the from and where clauses to figure out the columns on which the tables are joined.
If drone armies are vastly more powerful than human armies, the latter become insignificant much like unarmed civilians are irrelevant in a war today. If Ukraine loses its army, it will surrender. If an army of the future loses its drones it will be impossible to oppose the winner’s drones and would surrender as well.
Why obviously? It might as well be a passing fad, and all those uses oof ChatGPT might turn out to be a temporary amusement rather than real and lasting improvement of people's workflows. It's interesting how something comes out, and then all of a sudden so many people are immediately absolutely certain that it will have a massive impact at many levels, even before we've seen any meaningful ROI. To me it is a bit absurd and somewhat annoying. Of course, the tech is cool, it does have some amazing uses, but to forecast growth to trillions of dollars over the next few years and massive job losses seems premature and fuelled by relentless promotion, not only by the likes of OpenAI, but also by all the investment-hungry tech businesses - large and small.
Well, if you have multiple queries, you'd still have to write the cte multiple times. You could also use views for the same thing, and those are much more reusable.
A small bit of advice from me: consider the weight of the binoculars when buying them. They can be too heavy to hold for more than a minute - especially large ones made for astronomy. You will either want a tripod (which is inconvenient to carry around and set up), or you’d want the binoculars to be smaller in size.
While working for one of the largest consultancies, I had to interview an offshore candidate for an onshore position in my team. It was a database development job and I asked the typical SQL questions, data modelling, etc - all over Skype with no camera. The guy on the other side seemed very knowledgeable. Amazingly high level for the job actually, and better than what his CV suggested. Being an internal candidate, I did not suspect anything and recommended him for the job. A month or so after that, management flew him in and I got to meet him in person. To my surprise, his language skills and much less his technical skills were anywhere near what I experienced at the interview. He was very keen to be a manager, with very very poor SQL skills - even in theory. A friend of mine later told me that it is a common practice in the offshore dev center to let the good devs interview for positions and then to send another person to do the job. They apparently did that to clients quite often and it was not surprising to him that I got the same treatment - even though it was an internal assignment.
There was this case of a foreign student who submitted a perfectly written paper, obviously copy/pasted from some websites. At the interview, he could not answer any questions properly, and that made it even more clear that he could not have written the marketing-type paragraphs. I think he did just pass anyway, but that’s a different story - the university tended to let international students pass easier sometimes.
While at university, we had one professor who would assess student assignment papers after conducting an interview. It would take him 5-10 minutes per person and cheaters really did get caught out. It is a common practice in some universities and it's very hard to cheat when being asked questions in person. It can be done online, as long as the identity of the person can be verified. Takes a lot longer and is a lot more engaging that written tests, but it works.