Posting a job ad isn't the onerous part of the process though to be fair.
It does make me wonder what would happen if you put out 100 different job adverts split apart by £1,000 increments. I'm sorry you aren't suitable for the 100k job you applied for but would you consider our 97k role instead?
It makes sense for multiple job ads if there are completely different roles applied by completely different people. But, for the sake of hiring, it doesn't make sense to invent new titles just to justify differently negotiated salaries. For example, I was once hired as a "Senior Software Developer" who essentially got paid twice what the least senior Senior got; they were to some extent mislabelled: They were senior in another capacity than software, and had transitioned inside the company but kept their titel because people are vain. Our responsibilities were vastly different: He was a frontend tokenmaxxer, and I migrated strategic customers to on-prem Kubernetes by negotiating contracts, bootstrapping clusters, and adapting applications to run without autoscaling. They could have given either of us a different title, but for the sake of the value we added, the salary made sense.
A title like "Senior Software Developer" can range from 5 years of general-purpose web development experience to 20 years of highly specialized experience. Those "Principal" and "Staff" titles don't necessarily make sense outside of larger corporations.
Most recently I've seen salary ranges up to 30% of the upper bound. Completely reasonable.
This is why I am so careful about what I click and what signals I send to the algorithm. If you don't want to see car crashes then don't rubber neck with morbid curiosity at the first one.
I have never seen a Hitler post but if I saw one I would immediately block that user and the algorithm knows that. It doesn't show me people arguing it shows me debates and tech. Because that's what I taught it to do. It is not even hard it just requires a little discipline.
When a friend sends a link I refuse to click on it unless my VPN is on and I'm using Mullvad Browser. I don't want their taste (which is quite often look at this outrageous thing) ruining my feed.
One trick I have is if I see a video in my sidebar on YT that I don't want to taint my profile, I copy the url without going to it and open it in mpv directly. I tend to watch all my videos in mpv, but I do usually like to have them in my browser history and save them to playlists to find later as well, so I'm just skipping that part. I don't know if this method is perfect, they should still see my IP, but anecdotally I think it's been fine.
I've had their top level personal account for years (visionary or something equally wanky). What are others using instead? I'm not sure I want to continue funding someone that is behaving like this (if it is confirmed).
Some people hate AI so much that they start to deny facts that don't suit their narrative. If this had been found by a human being then they wouldn't be contorting themselves to try and deny it exists. Many people feel incredibly threatened by AI. It seems to inversely correlate with competence in my experience.
I think you're correct that people are trying to deny facts. However, I also believe your assertion of their beliefs is inaccurate.
History proves that new technology makes people twitchy in every direction. My anecdotal memory of X-rays is entertaining (we can use them to beam knowledge into brains!) and apocalyptic (X-ray guns will make warfare terrible!).
I have a rule for everything: the information is valid in inverse proportion to its political value. This is a bad exploit, and it happens from time to time. There's also an IPO connected to AI that is very political for many people who threw a lot of money at it.
Is the confirmation of a Google subsidiary, coordination from multiple government security agents and the word of the PHP developers not enough for you? Why not? Why is your bar of proof set so high? The downside of not reacting is far worse than the downside of reacting yet you seem to be suggesting under reacting would be superior?
Talk is cheap, yes. Which is why the working exploits from Wiz, Calif and the PHP team were rather more useful than another demand for a private demonstration.
Humans use heuristics such as credentials to navigate an overwhelmingly complex world. They are not infallible but they are quick enough and right enough that we reach for them instinctively.
and it's often not the right thing to do. Let's say the blog post was from a top social media influencer. Would that carry more weight for you? We should look at the content of the post more than the poster.
That is strictly true but there are work arounds. For example you can talk to an Iroh relay server from inside of a browser. You can also get round this with extensions. Unfortunately Google whitelist who can do this but it can be done on Safari.
reply