At least relative to any metric a rational person might consider relevant here.

It's completely idiotic to compare "how we engaged" immediately following the COVID lockdowns when everyone was scrambling to make sense of how to proceed against "how we engage" now, 3-years into a new remote shift where we've pretty much "seen it all" now and understand what works and what doesn't.

Compare, instead, how engaged we were 1 or 2 years prior to COVID to how engaged we are now. I'm pretty sure you'll find a different result. I'm pretty sure you'll find far more people these days willing to switch work life off in exchange for personal time.

Now..whether they *can* or not is an entirely different topic.

Did they forget quotes around prison? Or are these both really heading to a real prison?

Not sure what aspect of human behavior they're suggesting here as the mirror for male bees rolling them longer than females. Are males more juvenile than females? Oh...nevermind.

Perhaps you're reading the post I replied to differently than I did. So let's start with that.

IMO, he's already suggesting a self-imposed deadline here. Sure, it's based off Linus's deadline but it's an arbitrary and self-imposed offset off that. He's suggesting that you make up a new deadline that you're going to try to target yourself; it's self-imposed. To further support that opinion, OP then said:

So whether you interpret that previous statement the same as I did or not, OP went on to specifically state not relying on other people setting the deadlines...i.e., impose your own deadline...i.e., self-imposed.

So, yes, the post I'm replying to *IS* referring to a self-imposed deadline. What'd I miss there?

I'll take "Hard Pill to Swallow for $1000, Alex". As a member of that struggling group, I have to concede that your statement seems pretty valid to me. At least in most cases.

But ADHD can also present itself as periods of intense, hyper focus too, depending on the situation. And that can certainly go well with kernel dev.

I've done my share of driver dev in the past and as long as the task is challenging enough and/or will generate enough "bro creds" afterwards due to its perceived difficulty by peers, it works very well.

But when that task *isn't* like that (and most aren't), you're pretty much forced to make it challenging by pushing up against a deadline you have no control over. Once there's "almost no way to get it done now", then it becomes challenging and the dopamine kicks in. Definitely not kernel compatible at that point, IMO.

That's not how that works. That's not how any of this works. A self-imposed, artificial deadline does not work for those lacking self-regulation. It just doesn't. The dopamine boost that person requires cannot be produced with a deadline over which they have direct control. It has to be external. It has to be fixed. It has to be out of their control to be real. Once it's real, once it's fixed and set in stone, THEN they can get that dopamine hit by running up against it and being "forced" to crank out "whatever" in record time.

It sucks. It really does. Ask me how I know.

Yes, it's a coping mechanism. Yes it's illogical and inefficient, but for many it's the only way to participate.

That's "zoomer" to you, boomer. LOL...kids...amirite?

No, it's not. Really. Nothing about this effort sounds complicated...or deep...at all. This is the type of analysis I'd expect my new hire straight out of college to do. In fact, it even has that "college class project write up" feel to it.

You wrote some little python scripts to make some calls and throw some data up in Tableau for visualization (or whichever visualizer you're using...doesn't matter) and got expected results. The only "unexpected twist" you got was when you needed to bump the memory limit up on Postgre for large queries. That's not a twist and it's not unexpected.

However, what the author has going for himself is self confidence, a sense of discovery (even if he's really just re-discovering and re-inventing) and a seemingly solid foundation in the basics to build on. And I wouldn't want to squash that too hard because those factors can lead to cooler, bigger stuff down the road.

This should surprise no one.

Y'all know why Larry / Oracle really bought Sun, right? It had *zero* to do with the promising aspects of Sun / Solaris marketing prospects and *zero* to do with wanting to see the Java ecosystem thrive and prosper.

It had everything to do with Larry wanting to avenge and carry out his good friend Steve Job's dying wish of making Google pay dearly in a thermonuclear fashion for daring to offer a competitive alternative to the amazing iPhone. The only leverage anyone had for doing that was the flimsy chance of suing Google for copyright infringement on their underlying Java-like "technology".

The fact that this tactic had the chance of seriously crippling entire industries and livelihoods on a truly global scale mattered not. If only they could make Google stop producing Android or, if not that, force Google to pay royalties until they went under, than all would be well and Jobs could finally, at long last, have his restful peace.

Stewardship of Java? That was just an annoying side effect thrust upon them and they've tried every since to figure out how to kill it off without it being a blatantly obvious desire of theirs from the beginning. It's taken years and years, but they're getting closer and closer.

F'k Oracle and f'k Larry!

This sounds ominous to me. Like this may actually be the underlying reason for the delays.

But who knows? Nobody. And that's the problem. Too much double talk until the hammer finally drops and by then it's actually too late.

Good grief where are my mod points when I need them? You, sir, are an example of what I still come here for.

Thanks!

Yes, I'm stupid. EVERYONE knows this already because we've all read the papers and studied the quantum maths and stuff. I'm dumb and lazy and dim witted.

Ok, now that we've got that out of the way.

How does entanglement help with communication between parties that don't already know what's being sent between them? There's really got to be some core principle here that I'm just not considering here.

I get that entangled particles change states in coordination with each other but how does that help when neither end can know what what the other is doing with their particle? You don't exactly "sample" a quantum system and get precise information. You sample it several times and average out some probabilities. And each time you sample your entangled particle, aren't you just flipping states of the other? How does that help without some sort of communication between the two ends coordinating the effort?

Oh...wait...do you use multiple particles and the "information" you're sending is actually encoded somehow in *which* particles are being manipulated in some detectable way in the averages?

Yeah, there's some fundamental concept I'm oblivious to and I need a little diagram of how this works. For one, I'm concerned with the implied violation of faster than light information transfer suggested here. Suppose this system gets developed out to actually work many light years apart. Does that mean one end can talk to the other across time now? I'm so confused.

No. It isn't. The OP is suggesting that metrics collected while in school do not correlate to performance in the field. Everything in the summary, including your quoted snippet, refers only to how the new free-range, grass-fed students do "about as well" in their classes and graduate about as often. If that's your only criteria, that the students stay in the field long enough to pay for a 4-6 year degree, then success! But you leave open the bigger, and perhaps more relevant question, of how long they remain in the field and how well they do later. And that, as the OP suggests, is conveniently difficult to follow up on.

I SOOO wish Musk would consider forcing them to take that pill. Not wise, I know. And not gonna happen. But one can dream, right?