It looks like it wasn't "being good at programming competitions" that was negatively correlated with job performance.
It was "participated in programming competitions".
And there are some more "how to interpret machine learning models" caveats in that blog post.
It seems to me the biggest factor in explaining this is that the people who are just below the hiring line but participate in competitions get a bump over the line. Since there are more people just below the line than above it, the "participates" group is bottom-heavy, producing the correlation.
I do a lot of interviews, and it seems to me that lots of people with experience perform below how they "should", because they're not practiced at solving problems from scratch, they work all day on modifying larger systems. Programming competitions would fix that for them, as would most open-source hobby projects.
Right, turning on restricted mode removes many LGBT-related videos - and includes many too.
It's a hard problem for a computer to figure out which LGBT videos to keep in restricted mode. A video called "I'm gay, here's how I do my hair and makeup" is probably okay. A video called "Look at this gay hair and makeup!" is probably being used for bullying if it's getting passed around at a school that uses restricted mode.
It's common for ranking to change, even wildly, when significantly changing a website. Especially changing its address!
So what's the theory, Google waited and waited, watching and hoping that protonmail would change their address, to give them cover to change the ranking manually?
When I want to read a contrary view, I don't subscribe to a new magazine or type in the address of a blog I've never seen. How would I know which one to look at? So I Google it.
I don't want the algorithms released to the public where spammers can read them. That won't help diversity, I'll just get articles from the best spammers.
I wonder if Merkel already knows better but thinks this statement helps her politically somehow.
He's not like Belson's spiritual adviser if that's what you mean. He was just an engineer, but he gave talks about meditation to anyone who wanted to go.
Google employees can give themselves whatever title they like, and give talks (or invite people to come and give talks!) on any subject they like. That's why there's so many weird talks at Google - it just takes one person to agree to it.
It looks like it wasn't "being good at programming competitions" that was negatively correlated with job performance.
It was "participated in programming competitions".
And there are some more "how to interpret machine learning models" caveats in that blog post.
It seems to me the biggest factor in explaining this is that the people who are just below the hiring line but participate in competitions get a bump over the line. Since there are more people just below the line than above it, the "participates" group is bottom-heavy, producing the correlation.
I do a lot of interviews, and it seems to me that lots of people with experience perform below how they "should", because they're not practiced at solving problems from scratch, they work all day on modifying larger systems. Programming competitions would fix that for them, as would most open-source hobby projects.