what about "hello \"there\"" ?

Not sure what you are asking?

Haha, I do the I'm confused, but that is:

1 me being polite and not calling you an idiot.

2 me hedging my bets in case I am the idiot.

Yeah I definitely do that too. I've never really thought about why I use that language, but thinking about it, it feels like a short hand and slightly politer way of saying

> I think you're wrong

> Here's why I think you're wrong

> Please correct me if I've misunderstood something

And I thought this is the pinnacle of being a well mannered netizen. It turns out you actually shouldn't even THINK of others as idiots?

The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

As someone for whom the answer is always 'money' I learned very quickly that a certain level of -how should I call it- bullshit is necessary to get the HR person to pass my CV to someone competent. As I am not as skilled in bullshit as I am in coding, it would make sense to outsource that irrelevant part of the selection process, no?

Maybe it makes sense for you, however from their perspective, it's not an "irrelevant" part of the selection process, but the most important part.

Do they also promise not to use ai to evaluate the answers?

Also will they be happy to provide 200-400 word reasoning how answer to their question was evaluated for each and every candidate? Written by a human.

I would 100% expect a company to not use AI to evaluate candidates and, if they are, I wouldn't want to work there. That's far worse than using AI as the candidate.

the point of this exercise was (1) to weed out people who could not code at all, (2) have people fail after 7, so that they could low ball them to below 50k as they 'failed the test but they might deserve a chance'

Yeah because only ethical hackers ever look for vulnerabilities

That would be inhumane, what is next? paying college athletes a portion of the money generated?

I would not class someone in a persistent vegetative state as brain dead. My understanding is that for organ harvesting to take place the subject has to be brain dead.

Sure, and I’m far from an authority on these things, which are fortunately way outside my usual experience. I don’t know all the policies or laws or ethical guidance involved. My sole point was that someone opening their eyes and seeming to look around isn’t solid proof that the person is deliberately trying to take in their surroundings. By analogy, a football player laying on the ground with their arm up could be waving to the audience, but they could also be showing the fencing response to head trauma. It doesn’t mean they’re intentionally sticking their hand up. It could be the case, but it’s not proof of it.

A sky burial achieves the same purpose. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_burial

At least if the dead person starts thrushing around while you cut them up they stop soon afterwards.

Oof I can understand this from a purely logical standpoint, but those photos are deeply unsettling.

The son of the high ranking individual is appointed in a high position in some ministry. Anyone who cries nepotism is quickly reminded that he holds a prestigious western degree, and that is the reason for the appointment.