You're not wrong. Their engineering seems incredibly incompetent. I've often postulated that they have like 500 junior developers and like 12 people with more than 5 years programming experience.
There is probably like 2 people who keep the game engine running and when they quit the game will fall apart.
my tip would be absolutely don't start with all the normal shit everyone does. Learn some real niche or ultra modern shit first. Start with things that are considered very hard. CSS/react ect is absolutely worthless knowledge that is going to take just as much time to learn as something valuable that differentiates you.
there are an incredible number of specialties in programming. You don't want to be competing with 50 million other junior developers.
My second tip is unless you are a genius, the learning curve is going to suck. just gotta stick with it and grind it out till the shit is easy. Years of learning curve.
My third tip is talking about programming is an equally important skill as programming. You need to communicate with a lot of different developers often, so you can learn the lingo.
spoiler: this was extremely boring and stupid. Reading this, downloading the files and looking at them was a complete waste of time, this is a nothing burger.
academic junior developer gets wank off imagineering job and gets frustrated that he sucks at it.
Goes to burning man and takes acid, decides to switch careers.
Double posts it to hacker news, for the upvotes?
not to be rude, but does google care about the privacy of the chinese, where having the wrong religious or political beliefs can result in forced organ harvesting.
whats not a thing thats actually happening? Drugs and other procedures that increase synaptic/neural density are indeed happening.
Like i mentioned, i don't know all the AI terminology but isn't there an unresolved argument that ai architecture in the short run can't mimic biological decision making, and so the decisions will always be different/ tasks for which tool AI will be better to help the biological decision making processes?
is it? It seemed to me like author assumes AI decision making will be roughly equivalent to biological decision making, just faster. I thought one of the Chinese room arguments is that biological decisions will always be "different" than AI ones.
Also it seemed like the author assumes great technological advances in AIs, but not in biology. If we're gonna dream shit up why not dream that brains in the future will be 10,000 times as dense and computers won't be able to keep up except as tools.