A forklift is "lifting" things, despite using a completely different mechanical process as a human "lifting" things. The only real similarity between these kinds of "lifting" is the end result, something is higher up than it was before.
> but it's really helpful when it comes to fixing your mistakes, allowing you to be successful.
It would be helpful if they'd take a loss as a learning opportunity. But as stated in the original quote they threw a tantrum and accused the opponent of cheating, taking away no lesson to improve the next time around.
This entirely depends on the company culture. I worked in teams where every small decision is in the hand of the PO and I've worked in teams where a software engineer is a respected professional enabled to make their own technical decisions. I found the second option to create higher quality software faster.
Also not sure what you mean by additional effort? Created_at, updated_at or soft-deletes are part of most proper frameworks. In Spring all you need is an annotation, I've been using those in major projects and implementation cost is around a few seconds with so far zero seconds of maintenance effort in years of development. At least those fields are solved problems.
But what if it's not a technical decision? What if there are legal implications around data retention that it's not your job to be aware of?
I've been parts of teams where features had to be totally thrown out and rebuilt because developers made big assumptions that turned out to be wrong, because they didn't think it was worth it to check with the product owner. Because they assumed it was only a "technical decision", or they assumed they understood the customer needs despite never actually asking the customer.
This doesn't mean checking with product around each line of your code, obviously. But deciding what information gets stored in the database, what level of event tracking you do, whether deletes are hard or soft -- these have massive product implications, and potentially legal ones.
And it is additional effort. Now you have to write tests for all those things. Are the timestamps being stored correctly? Are the permission bits being stored correctly? Is "created_by" coming from the right user? Are we sure a malicious user can't spoof that? Do we care? Is "updated_at" actually being updated on every row change? But are we making sure "updated_at" is not getting changed when we import data from a separate table? How often do we remove soft-deleted data in order to comply with privacy policies and regulations, and with what cron job, and who maintains that? Where do alerts go if the cron job fails? What happens if that employee leaves? I could go on and on and on.
So that's what I mean by additional effort. It's not "around a few seconds". Because it's not just a technical question, it's a product one. It's a proper feature that needs to be properly defined and properly scoped out and properly tested.
No. Just no. Put created_at, updated_at on every table. You are really grasping to find a problem with it, because there isn't one, and its been helpful in literally every job I've had for the last 28 years. Product owners don't do application support.
That's not all the article was suggesting. You're ignoring the other three fields the article says to "store on almost any table".
I'm not "grasping", I'm describing actual reality. While you're misrepresenting the article by cherry-picking the simplest fields, which aren't even always simple for the reasons I gave.
A bad analogy doesn't make a good argument. The best analogy for LLMs is probably a librarian on LSD in a giant library. They will point you in a direction if you have a question. Sometimes they will pull up the exact page you need, sometimes they will lead you somewhere completely wrong and confidently hand you a fantasy novel, trying to convince you it's a real science book.
It's completely up to your ability to both find what you need without them and verify the information they give you to evaluate their usefulness. If you put that on a matrix, this makes them useful in the quadrant of information that is both hard to find, but very easy to verify. Which at least in my daily work is a reasonable amount.
> For each problem, our system sampled many candidate submissions and submitted 50 of them based on a test-time selection strategy. Submissions were selected based on performance on the IOI public test cases, model-generated test cases, and a learned scoring function. If we had instead submitted at random, we would have only scored 156 points on average, suggesting that this strategy was worth nearly 60 points under competition constraints.
Did you read the post? OpenAI clearly states that the results are cherry-picked. Just a random query will have far worse results. To get equal results you need to ask the same query dozens of time and then have enough expertise to pick the best one, which might be quite hard for a problem that you have little idea about.
Combine this with the fact that this blog post is a sales pitch with the very best test results out of probably many more benchmarks we will never see and it seems obvious that human experts are still several order of magnitudes ahead.
When I read that line too I was very confused lol. I interpreted it as them saying they basically took other contestant submissions and allowing the model to see these "solutions" as part of context? and then having the model generate its own "solution" to be used for the benchmark. I fail to see how this is "solving" a ioi level question.
What is interesting is the following paragraph in the post
" With a relaxed submission constraint, we found that model performance improved significantly. When allowed 10,000 submissions per problem, the model achieved a score of 362.14 – above the gold medal threshold – even without any test-time selection strategy. "
So they didn't allow sampling from other contest solutions here? If that is the case quite interesting, since the model is effectively imo able to brute force questions. Provided you have some form of a validator able to tell it to halt.
I've started doing something similar around a year ago, after noticing that I reached basically all goals I set out for myself after school. I was at a point where I felt like I stopped growing as a person and found myself unhappy with my life, yet was seemingly stuck.
What I did was to have a very strong introspection over a few weeks. I thought about each important aspect of my life - social life, family, career, hobbies, health, even my daily structure - and formulated a very specific target for each area. Basically a well thought out fantasy character. This was hard work, it took many nights of thinking and it's honestly a process that never stops, even nowadays I still update that document from time to time.
Once I had a list I was reasonably happy with, I started thinking of the type of person that would reach that goals and what kind of habits they had. And then I started implementing them. The most important part here is a habit of doing stuff. I can not stress enough how important that is, everything else pales in comparison. I recommend reading Atomic Habits and personally follow the "Getting Things Done" system. But once you have written down everything you need to do and actually do it, you have a superpower and the ability to transform every part of your life in a few months. I found that most "hard" things in life are actually quite easy to do, it's just that doing stuff consistently is extremely hard.
I agree with the author, simply telling people about your future self also helps massively. The first time it will feel extremely weird, like talking about a fantasy character. You will talk about some guy you seemingly have nothing in common with and talk about future achievements with absolutely nothing to back it up. But do it 2-3 times and suddenly that future self will feel familiar. Do it some more, take some steps to be that person and suddenly you'll be far more similar to that guy than you could've ever envisioned.
At least for myself this process was the most important thing I've ever done in my life. I've gone from a pretty shy, boring, somewhat depressed and risk-averse guy to moving across the country for an awesome job, restarting my entire social life and solo-travelling across the world. And most importantly, I'm happy now, it feels like I'm finally me and not just the product of my upbringing and surroundings.
I’m so incredibly far from this level of self actualization that it scares me. I think it’s mostly the ADHD traits that make habit formation difficult: I’m usually stuck fighting for the bottom of my Maslows pyramid
I’m also someone with ADHD and I think looking at all the steps from here to there really discourages me.
I read a quote recently that said that great things don’t just happen, they’re the accumulation of consistent daily efforts.
I really want to make a publish a game after ~20 years of making (the majority of some) games as a hobby.
My route there, as someone who also has a hard time forming habits, is to really push to do _anything_ to further my game every single day.
That might be just sketching a mechanic in my notebook, or starting the MC’s character model, or even just emailing my game dev friends asking for feedback.
My hope is that the accumulation of these daily acts will get me there.
It may take longer than others who can stay focused for more than 30 mins at a time, and that’s ok.
Yeah “Just Showing Up” and not having inflated expectations for results is a great way to stay working on something long term for me. That’s difficult because the lure of perfectionism is usually what entices me to start in the first place.
I’ve seen a lot of self-help stuff on habits but not perfectionism. I’d love to figure out a way to beat it because i think part of my laziness and procrastination is from anxiety around doing something i judge as bad.
I’m in the exact same boat, ADHD and gamedev. And my solution is the same, do a little bit every day.
I have experience with programming and audio so the only thing I’m missing is art skills. So my routine is 30 minutes of programming and 30 minutes of art practice per day. It seems to be working so far.
I was diagnosed with ADHD last year, at 31 years old. It made so much sense.
The idea of your "future self" is actually what helped me improve my ability to form habits.
"If I do X, Y, Z, today, then tomorrow I only have to do A and I have all this free time. Let me be miserable today so I don't have to be stressed tomorrow and I can do anything I want."
It allowed me to unleash my ADHD and kind of embrace it almost on alternating days.
One of Hal Hershfield's talk's had mentioned that we always imagine our "Future Self" will be less busy than we are today, so we won't over extend ourselves today, because tomorrow you'll be less stressed. But this isn't usually the case.
For example: You won't have any more ability to make it to the bank tomorrow, than you do today. So if you do it today, tomorrow you won't even have to think about it. Your ADHD is less likely to fire off with all the other things you "have to do". If you only have one task, you can kind of just do it.
This has been a game changer mentality for my executive function disorder.
I went to the doctor because I was having difficulty doing the things I really loved. Mountain Biking, Hiking, etc. The motivation wasn't there, but it's all I wanted to do, but couldn't mentally get the drive to do it.
I assumed this was depression, and after some questions, the doctor insisted that it wasn't depression and asked if I had been diagnosed with ADHD in the past.
Then, he asked me to try Wellbutrin as an off-label use for ADHD, which dramatically changed my ability to function. I have since stopped taking it as I have a lot of systems in place that help with my executive function, but I still feel that taking it would make my EFD better.
The feeling of "depression" has since subsided, but I do still suffer from brain fog frequently when I get overwhelmed with scheduling or tasks I deem "insignificant" that I need to do, such as:
Send a short email.
Deposit a check.
Put gas in the car.
Send that Mutual NDA.
But large tasks like:
Run a 5k every day.
Study a language for an hour.
Design that app flow.
Help a friend develop a business plan
Organize and event for 50 people that serves dinner
are typically easy.
It's really the small tasks that break my brain. Big easy are fun and enjoyable because there's a tangible outcome, but small tasks that should be easy but have some sort of barrier just break me.
Find a psychiatrist in your area who specializes in ADHD (psychologytoday.com is actually a great resource) and ask about ADHD diagnosis. You may want to get more than one opinion though; not all diagnoses are equal.
I agree with almost all the points of the author, and I absolutely have seen the benefits of journaling and writing down any future aspirations like a TODO list.
> simply telling people about your future self also helps massively.
However, this is something I’ve found hit or miss. Telling people you know can set expectations, especially if you are passionate about it. You can set the bar incredibly high for yourself and be satisfied with partial success, but you won’t feel as satisfied if you didn’t match up to a friends expectations after hyping it up, even if they are still incredibly supportive of you. In the end, I’d rather show them my actions and results than overhype them with words that shoot for the moon.
I read Atomic Habits late last year and it didn't really resonate with me. Maybe I just had too high expections of it, as basically everyone says it's a must read.
This year I've read "The 12 Week Year" and it clicked so much more with me. The book is more practical and goes deep into processes and steps you can use to achieve your goals.
I completely agree. I'm always amused by the idea that dating apps have this secret, sophisticated algorithm that gives you dates that are nice but leave you wanting more. Human relationships are hard and I doubt that the best experts in the field could come up with something like that, and it's certainly impossible for an algorithm without any information about the person. I always feel that these complaints come from the frustration of not being able to find the perfect partner, from people who don't even come close to the standard they want in a partner.
In my experience, online dating is a pretty well functioning marketplace. People have a limited amount of time to date, so they'll take the best one they can get. Of course, online dating narrows down the ranking process to superficial information, but I don't think there's a technical solution to that. As a man I've seen both sides of the coin. When I started out with online dating I didn't have good pictures, no good bio, no good writing skills and didn't pay. I went months without a good match and even longer without a date. Then I decided to clean up my profile, highlight my strengths as a potential partner, learned to carry a fun conversation and started paying for the product and suddenly had to reject women, simply because I had too many options for any given night.
Dating apps are just a more extreme form of real dating. Dating always has been a competition, people will choose the best partner they can get. The advantage of the real world is that people often don't have many choices, but the disadvantage of the real world is also that people don't have many choices. Apps get rid of that disadvantage, but also of that advantage.
What's wrong with cancelling Amazon Prime? I did it recently and it took less than a minute. I even had the option to cancel immediately and have them refund my money, even though my yearly subscription was still running for half a year, which AFAIK is not possible for App Store subscriptions. I'm in EU so might be different to US.
