My experience is this mostly between men and generally not as common as it used to be.
My dad is called by his surname by some of his high school pals and call some of them by surname when he's around them (but not in reference to them if he's talking to me). Thinking back to my high school days in the late 00's I can only remember athletes being called by their last name. Perhaps because of football or sports that you just have your last name on your jersey. It would be an interesting thing to understand more.
I could be regional too. I'm from the US in the midwest.
Nicknames include variations like Mikey, Mickey, Mikail, Big Michael, Little Michael, Gas Station Michael, Angry Michael, Tony (obligatory wrong name your group uses because there were already too many Michaels and this Michael liked his middle name)
a lot of the time its just a nickname. public schools in the US are huge and then when it comes to sports the athletes are visiting other schools. before i knew it id meet 12 new Jakes every year so everyone goes by nicknames or last name
theres an occasional phenomenon in the US, often referenced in sitcoms, where an individuals entire first and last name sticks as their "nickname"
In my high school (Massachusetts, USA), almost all the students went by their last names, or something related to their last names. Ashley Milford was Milf, Samantha St. Paul was Saint Paul, Ryan Leonard was Lenny, Kevin Doo was Kevin Doo, for example. I'm still my surname in my head.
I learned later that we had a reputation for being a jock school though, because we all had to play a sport each semester.
I believe they mean realizing that if you had invested into stocks instead of money market you'd have likely realized a quite large return. Money markets seek to keep your returns to around inflation.
MTR is a useful tool but it is a somewhat common source of illusory issues since it generates so many icmp time exceeded packets that routers stop replying to other folks running traces. It's important, as others said, to understand that these aren't testing the data path of a network but instead the control plane path.
What tools exist for people to test the data path of network reliably? In my experience MTR has worked well enough to approximate network routing issues. But it has always felt like a blunt tool given it can't do anything about hops with firewalls.
This is a breath of fresh air compared to the tesla approach which seems to be don't release any data that isn't biased. Waymo is being a responsible party here by releasing all this data even if some of the stuff around the waymo driver hitting roadway objects (like the parking lot bar or the shopping cart) is a little concerning.
What exactly is biased about the Tesla data? If anything it is far less biased imo cause it is over a massive sample of 9 billion autopilot miles as opposed to 1 million (more than 9000x the sample size)
Teslas turn off auto-pilot as soon as it finds a complicated situation, self-filtering better statistics. This also means they drive a shitton on highways, which are just simply ”easy mode”. A better statistic report would weight a mile of city driving conditions multiple times that of a mile on the highway.
None of that introduces bias - that is how the system is designed to work. My car has automatic cruise control that turns off in the rain. It does that FOR safety, not to boost any statistics.
Bias suggests incomplete data or poorly sampled or manipulated - this is none of that. These are raw statistics on the functionality of a system - if you want to introduce bias to weight certain miles more than others that’s on you and you can do any analysis you want but Tesla is reporting what they should be - the raw statistics.
Part of the issue is pressure to audit EITC recipients.
"a baffling twist of logic, the intense IRS focus on Humphreys County is actually because so many of its taxpayers are poor. More than half of the county’s taxpayers claim the earned income tax credit, a program designed to help boost low-income workers out of poverty. As we reported last year, the IRS audits EITC recipients at higher rates than all but the richest Americans, a response to pressure from congressional Republicans to root out incorrect payments of the credit."
Personally I think you should strike this "(...because failure is not an option! ;) )" it's a little offputting. I also think you should put a salary range. I get how it kind of reveals your hand but it also sets expectations.
I think you have it right. I study for a lot of certification exams (They are very popular in networking and security), I've found that a lot of content around learning has moved to videos rather than "exam guides" produced by the vendor/company offering the video. It could be styles of learning thing but I much prefer the written content.
It strikes me that one advantage of the written word is that the information density is so much higher than in other mediums. I generally watch the videos at 2x speed and still feel like I'm not learning as much when I read for an equivalent time.
However your point about "what" you read is well taken. Just as in watching youtube or movies you can read trash just as you can watch trash.
>It strikes me that one advantage of the written word is that the information density is so much higher than in other mediums.
This is true, but it also goes beyond density. Long-form written works tend to have more room for breadth, depth and nuance. I find that's where much of the value sometimes comes from, e.g., I didn't get anything much out of the main text of the last non-fiction book I read, but three of the footnotes introduced me to other sources that did turn out to be useful for my work.
The brain is wired with language. Our inner monologues are most commonly speaking to ourselves using words. Reading is similar to meditation in that it's about YOU controlling your thoughts, putting focus into what you're reading. Additionally, the content is the result of a process: some form of author qualification, editing, formatting, publication took place. It's also intimate: just the author and you (although, this is not necessarily true). But on the whole I suspect there's more integrity on the printed page, less "big money" certainly. In summary, there are lots of reasons why reading deserves a privileged place.
However, if you want to learn something, you gotta go at it from every direction: maybe first of all just try head on, try & fail. Then read books if available, of course, but search online, look for YouTube videos, seek out mentors, and so on. Just like everything else you can only read effectively for so many hours per day.
In the end I can only really speak for myself: reading books feels TO ME like one of the best possible uses of time. You would have to pry the books out of my cold dead hands, etc. So just out of fellow feeling I try to encourage others to read more. But whatever works for you!
> Long-form written works tend to have more room for breadth, depth and nuance. I find that's where much of the value sometimes comes from, e.g., I didn't get anything much out of the main text of the last non-fiction book I read, but three of the footnotes introduced me to other sources that did turn out to be useful for my work.
All of this is why I strongly favor reading. Well written books are just so worth sinking the time into, and then you have references/bibliographies. Yeah, you need to do something instead of "reading all the time" (stramwan from the article), but sometimes doing it correctly, or even just better, starts with a good book.
My dad is called by his surname by some of his high school pals and call some of them by surname when he's around them (but not in reference to them if he's talking to me). Thinking back to my high school days in the late 00's I can only remember athletes being called by their last name. Perhaps because of football or sports that you just have your last name on your jersey. It would be an interesting thing to understand more.
I could be regional too. I'm from the US in the midwest.