Similar to another poster. Our 6 year old was just diagnosed with it.
The formal test was a short survey about our childs behavior in various situations. It was highly subjective with questions similar to "My child has difficulty sitting still" (Never, Sometimes, Often).
There was not example of what is considered sometimes or often and what is age appropriate for a 6 year old.
The survey was required to be answered by the parents and kindergarten teacher. That was all that was necessary to have the option of medication.
Even more surprising is that with only slight more effort we now have the option to put our child on an IEP (indivdualized education plan) where there will now be a full additional teacher in the classroom assisting her.
Overall it has been an eye opening experience. Compared to our first child, our 6 year old is more spirited, but is not violent or defiant. She is mostly concerned with her own interests and will admittedly have difficulty focusing for long periods of time. I would be very curious if her behavior is above the threshold for ADHD in other countries.
This was just our experience and it is very possible that our child was an obvious case so further analysis was not necessary. For now we have opted not to use medication. Interestingly our diagnosing pediatrician has two children with ADHD and said that they put both children on medication at 6 years old.
I was in the exact same situation. I loved my team at Meta and learned a ton, but after the increased intensity QA from Zuck I went through two rounds of re-structuring and was shuffled to new teams. I found that I didn't have the motivation to learn the specific implementation of the huge layers of abstraction the new team was creating.
Couple this with a general questioning my life goals and if I want to spend more of it on making ad serving slightly better. I was left searching. I've landed at a new gig and I've been so much happier despite a sizable pay cut at my new role.
In general, while it clearly created huge turmoil, I wonder if one large round where you potentially cut too deep would be better on company health than many smaller rounds. I'd be curious if the sentiment of engineers at Twitter is now more positive then that at Meta.
As a general financial instrument there seems to be too large an opportunity for fraud and scams that it seems to generally not be worth it outside of hedges against hyper inflation.
But the general idea of web3, personal ownership of data that you can seamlessly move to different interfaces, and as a way to trust documents still all seem like great reasons to have public ledgers. This may not be in the currency space, but I feel like general crypto is something I would like to see in the future.
I also love the idea of moving fully to stable coins for better tracking related to tax implications. I'm not sure of how this would work fully, but there seems far too much opportunity for tax evasion and fraud under the current systems and moving to a stable coin seems like it could aid in that regard.
I'm not trying to say that there hasn't been a history of racism nor even that it isn't prevalent today. I just want to understand how we accurately measure the actual effects of it so that we can understand how much effort to put into solving it or measuring if it is getting better over time. And some of the most used measures I find as evidence seem to be about the distribution of races in various jobs which on its own doesn't necessarily seem like a reliable metric to me.
Others pointed out some studies which showed potential biases in hiring and that seems like a great potential proxy to understand the current level of racism in hiring.
This seems to be the largest potential issue then with my understanding of requiring research a-priori to match an assumed outcome or ideal. I wonder if an academic wanted to rigorously attempt to isolate between these, would they be allowed to publish the results were found that systemic issues were not significant. It seems potentially dangerous if we stifle publications of studies that find minimal impact of racism because it could have the impact of only highlighting the cases of racism, but not the net impact.
My understand for how we measure systemic racism issues seems to typically be predicated on assumed outcomes. For example that if the distribution of employees race does not match the general population then there must be a systemic cause for this.
What I don’t understand is why that is assumed true. If we want to encourage many different cultures to live together wouldn’t it naturally make sense that different cultures would have different outcomes in job preferences? How do you separate potential racism from cultural differences?
My fear is if there are strong cultural differences that lead to disparate racial outcomes so organizations will always be able to point out that systemic issues exist even when they may be eradicated. I don’t know how we measure this.
I need to check again, but from my understanding the damage is exponential based on the vehicle weight, but also that real road damage is functionally nothing until you get to very large heavy vehicles
Exactly. While ML interpretability may be tough, I don't really read it like that. More here are X number of algorithms and each one is aiming to do Y. Chronological, Engagement, Happiness, Current Trends, etc.
The formal test was a short survey about our childs behavior in various situations. It was highly subjective with questions similar to "My child has difficulty sitting still" (Never, Sometimes, Often).
There was not example of what is considered sometimes or often and what is age appropriate for a 6 year old.
The survey was required to be answered by the parents and kindergarten teacher. That was all that was necessary to have the option of medication.
Even more surprising is that with only slight more effort we now have the option to put our child on an IEP (indivdualized education plan) where there will now be a full additional teacher in the classroom assisting her.
Overall it has been an eye opening experience. Compared to our first child, our 6 year old is more spirited, but is not violent or defiant. She is mostly concerned with her own interests and will admittedly have difficulty focusing for long periods of time. I would be very curious if her behavior is above the threshold for ADHD in other countries.
This was just our experience and it is very possible that our child was an obvious case so further analysis was not necessary. For now we have opted not to use medication. Interestingly our diagnosing pediatrician has two children with ADHD and said that they put both children on medication at 6 years old.