Exactly. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. You get what you (didn’t) pay for. If you try to cut employees by using AI then you deserve this. You also deserve this if you don’t pay your employees a decent wage. But they won’t learn anything from this.

Depending on what you meant by this question, I’d say Perplexity. It’s got access to a number of different LLMs, and cited its sources. The biggest concern I’ve had when it comes to LLMs is that they eventually make shit up. If you can verify its answers by checking its sources, you have a much higher confidence level in the answer.

I’ve been a software engineer for the last 17 years, with the last 11 years having been in management. The further people get in their career the easier it is to forget to stay humble. You can’t always be the smartest person in the room. It’s statistically unlikely. One of my favorite books I’ve read is “The Secret: What Great Leaders Know and Do” (not to be confused with “The Secret”). The book covers how you can stay humble in your career, reinvent yourself, value the contributions of others, etc. The fact is that even if you end up in a leadership position, you won’t necessarily be the smartest person in the room. Even if you made a great decision for the team years ago, that may not hold up now. Be open to the fact that you’re wrong. Be open to change. If you can’t do that then you’re going to end up set aside as a dinosaur. Adapt. If you don’t then you’ll be left behind. And be kind, because you never know who you’ll work with again. Being smart isn’t carte blanche to be an asshole to anyone who isn’t as smart as you. You’ll likely need them at some point if you stick around long enough.

It’s annoying to me that sometimes I have to use Reddit because the only answer I can find to a problem I’m having is in a Reddit post or comment. I would prefer to never use it again, but I’ll settle for only using it when strictly necessary.

If your manager is a good manager, then nothing that comes up in your review should be a surprise. Talk about a plan to get to the next level. Nothing will ever be guaranteed, but if you work together on a plan and have milestones to meet then you’ll have a better chance of getting a raise and promotion. Obviously, not every review cycle can include a raise or promotion, so be reasonable.

A good review has what are called SMART goals. They should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-based. If your manager fails to give you goals that meet that criteria, then chances are you aren’t both working toward the same thing. Be open to criticism, because you probably won’t be doing everything well. Make sure you’re having regular one-on-ones with your manager, or whoever gauges your progress. If you’re early in your career, I would recommend every week, or every two weeks at most. This way you have regular feedback. Make sure you take notes.

Jirard’s words were unambiguous over the years, though. It was always “we’re working with…” or “we’ve donated to…” and not “we’re looking at these charities”. I don’t know what the rationale for hanging on to that money was, whether it was for the right reasons or not. What I do know is that people were lied to. It doesn’t matter if he intended to or not. It’s not a good spot to be in, and I can’t imagine it gets much better from here. The whole thing felt very much like w crypto scam, except the money was still available, but there was a whole lot of “trust me, bro” and misrepresentation of what was happening behind the scenes.

How many years of research do you need in order to pick the charity or university you want to fund? How many times do you repeat the lies (with numbers!) without even knowing what your own charity is doing? I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a different reason they hung on to the money, because this doesn’t pass the sniff test. Where there’s smoke there’s fire.