Should Job-Seekers Stop Using AI to Write Their Resumes?
If they are to be expected to use AI in their jobs ( which is invariably going to be the case ) - shouldnt Job Seekers demonstrate an aptitude for using it ?
Cant have it both ways....
The problem here is that developers can take responsibility for the action while AI can not. Humans do make mistakes and that's ok; best practice is not to just can employees for messing up. Once is a mistake. Twice is an HR event. When someone does something dumb we forgive but we also insist that meaningful steps are taken to prevent that problem in the future. AI can't really take those steps because AI can't be accountable for "don't do it again." Taking down production because you dropped a table once is forgivable. Taking it down twice for the same reason is a different matter.
The developer can be accountable. And if HR fails to hold them to account for it, HR is accountable. And if HR isn't held accountable, leadership is. And if leadership isn't held accountable, the board is. And if the board isn't held accountable, the stockholders have some hard decisions to make. And if they choose not to make them than it wasn't really that big a deal, was it?
But with an AI the option is "we stop using AI" or "we live with the result."
Everyone is so excited about not having to pay software engineers to write code that they've forgotten what engineers actually do. It's less common in the software world but go find a civil engineer or an electrical engineer or an aerospace engineer and follow them around for a week.
At some point, there's going to be a document in front of them laying out how something is going to be built and they're going to be asked to approve it. And when they do that they're taking responsibility for the design. If it falls down, if it catches on fire, or if it crashes into the mountains and kills people, they're the name on the form saying that won't happen. They're responsible.
Claude 4.5 Opus is very impressive, but if it writes a software application that kills people it can't take responsibility. It can't be punished. It can't even really be sued.
I just don't see how we, as a society, can trust fundamentally unaccountable entities to build systems that can do real harm if they go wrong. I suppose the alternative is that Anthropic accepts full legal liability for everything its models do. Their unwillingness to make that move tells you all you probably need to know about their own internal confidence in those models.
The difficulties described are consequences of Apple’s proprietary platform design, not evidence that Linux or ARM are immature ecosystems. Conflating ISA compatibility with platform openness is a fundamental misunderstanding of how hardware enablement works.
“Linux doesn’t feel ready for ARM yet. Many apps aren’t compiled for ARM.”
This is the weakest argument in the article.
ARM Linux is widely deployed on:
Billions of Android devices (Linux kernel)
Most cloud hyperscalers (Graviton, Ampere)
Raspberry Pi ecosystem
Embedded and industrial systems
Major distros eg:
Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian have mature AArch64 support.
And today most open-source software compiles cleanly for ARM64.
Browsers, compilers, containers, dev tools are fully native.
Even Steam supports ARM via translation layers.
The real issue is x86-only proprietary binaries.
That’s not Linux-on-ARM immaturity.
That’s legacy x86 ecosystem inertia.
Even Apple solves this via Rosetta — a translation layer.
Linux uses FEX or box64 for similar purposes.
Translation instability platform immaturity.
I guess the source is MSN though
One thing the science does tell us is that we all have a very hard time separating the world that existed when we were children from our perception of that world through the eyes of a child.
Ask nearly any population in the United States when this country was best and you'll get a majority who'll swear to you it was when they were teenagers. The age of the group doesn't matter. You get the same result from 20 year olds as 40 year olds as 60 year olds as 80 year olds. And what you're seeing is people looking back to a time when they had lots of free time, lots of freedom, and most of their income was disposable and thinking "that was pretty great." And it was.... except they were living under a roof someone else paid for and still experiencing the risks and complexities of the world through the filter and safety net provided by their parents.
And since we're being scientific about this: yes, obviously not everyone. I'm sure someone reading this right now is thinking "I had a tough childhood." And I'm sure they did but anecdotes are not data.
The 1980s were -- and I say this as both a historian and someone who lived through them -- fucked. Reagan torched the New Deal consensus. The AIDS crisis was literally laughed out of the White House press room. Our government perpetuated a long string of dirty intelligence/foreign-policy interventions. The wealthy and powerful were juiced to the gills on cocaine.
There was a sense of decorum which has sense evaporated from American politics but that's about it.
"We had sex in a chinese hotel"
Anti-China Propaganda - like chinese hotels are the only place this is happening
Like BBC has broadcast one iota of truth regarding the Epstien revelations that might shed more light on the actions of the royal nonce, ex prime ministers or
high ranking british pedophiles... Weird i think isnt it that they dont have any airtime for to tell the truth on the biggest trafficking / pedophile ring ever. Maybe thats because BBC is also an organisation that enabled and paid nonces
like
Rolf Harris ,
Billy Idol ,
Jimmy Saville,
Stuart Hall,
Huw Edwards,
Chris Denning,
Johnathan King,
Chris Langham
All bankrolled by the nations LEAST trusted nonce enabling broadcaster.
I smell a dead cat story, and the reason i do not watch , not fund british nonce-enabling broadcast television via the TV License.
I highly recommend people boycott it. In fact if you ARE paying and watching BBC programmes - why do you fund this - what does this say about you?
Out team of ~8 (pentestesting & VA) were unanimous about Copilot being crap and Claude being the top dog. So some higher ups OK'd a Claude Teams package for work. To bypass the CorpSec tards, we use it from our lab environment that has its own unmonitored link and IP range.
Anthropic/Claude is just so far ahead of OpenAI/ChatGPT and MS/Copilot it's not funny.
The Foundation TV series has been a lot of fun but I just can't shake how very much it is NOT ASIMOV'S FOUNDATION. Not even a little bit. It's fine that they didn't want to tell the Foundation story. Honestly, I'm not sure it would make good TV in a faithful adaptation. But... why set yourself up for failure like that? It's not like the majority of the people watching it are 1940s era Sci Fi fans.
Inside the
Make it myself? But I'm a physical organic chemist!
