I'm the hiring manager for this role, which is for an IC tech lead. Please see the full job description for details, but I'm looking for someone who is comfortable leading engineering discovery and working with Product on roadmap planning within the API payroll integrations space. The most important thing in this role will be driving your own pace and taking projects from inception to completion. A successful candidate will be good at working efficiently without many hard deadlines or micromanagement. We also want someone who has strong systems design experience and good technical leadership skills. In terms of tech stack, it's mostly Python and Typescript, including nest.js
Our interview process is pretty straightforward. There's a phone screen with our recruiter, then a culture fit/qualifying interview with my boss, a technical interview with a real-world problem (no leetcode), and finally a cross-functional team interview with myself and another engineering leader at my company. We move pretty quickly and aim to keep the process respectful of everyone's time.
Happy to answer any questions here! If you'd like to apply, please email recruiting [at] vestwell [dot] com with your resume.
Plus, email access is assumed for identity verification these days. Whether that's porting a number out from a wireless carrier or any service that has your email but not your phone number.
You can also look at past posts by the same author (before LLM usage proliferated) if you’re curious.
The project is still very cool, but it’s a little less enjoyable to read when everything sounds the same. It would be just as annoying for people to manually write in a corporate/marketing style, because humanity is what makes the small web interesting.
What's interesting about the older post is that all the sentences are long, compared to the current datacenter GPU post which contains lots of short sentences.
But yeah, probably feels sucky to have your style analyzed for AI writing. FWIW, the datacenter GPU post was great! I went to look at the ebay postings.
I mean, if they're serious, put it through 10-20 "AI Detectors" that cover different models. (I've had to do that with samples of new 'textbooks' showing up on Amazon under various false names.)
GPTzero says 100% AI generated for specific paragraphs that I chose (such as `Multi-token prediction`). If you remove all the code listings, tables, etc and just paste the prose into these tools, it drops to 87% AI generated.
None of the 3x older blogs of yours that I tried went above 5% AI generated.
Maybe you're spending so much of time with the LLM that you are talking like it; in which case, take an old blog and a recent blog, give the prose from them both to you favourite LLM and ask them if the same author wrote both. I just did that on ChatGPT and on Gemini, and both found that it is extremely unlikely that the same author wrote both.
Look, if all the SOTA LLMs agree that your recent blogs sounds generated, you can't blame the reader, can you?
It thinks this is AI:
“I bought a datacenter GPU that doesn’t even have a normal PCIe connector, stuck it in my gaming PC with an adapter, and now I have 32GB of VRAM across two GPUs running a 27 billion parameter model at 32 tokens per second.”
There’s nothing AI about that. Not all SOTA LLMs agree, hell, none of them do. The same exact example I sent here gives me 0% in some, 10% in others, 100% in GPTzero.
This, setting aside the llm issue, it is dealing with hardware in ways that -- one would think - would be celebrated on HN of all places. But we focus on presentation.
It rubs me the wrong way that the person opening this PR says "we have decided not to implement OS-level age attestation" when they seem to have no prior involvement with systemd, and it's clearly not their call to make.
I wouldn't go so far as to call it astroturfing, but it's the same thing that's irksome about anyone claiming to speak on behalf of a group they actually have no involvement in. Feels like someone trying to score cheap points.
The main thing I don’t see being discussed in the comments much yet is that this was a good_first_issue task. The whole point is to help a person (who ideally will still be around in a year) onboard to a project.
Often, creating a good_first_issue takes longer than doing it yourself! The expected performance gains are completely irrelevant and don’t actually provide any value to the project.
Plus, as it turns out, the original issue was closed because there were no meaningful performance gains from this change[0]. The AI failed to do any verification of its code, while a motivated human probably would have, learning more about the project even if they didn’t actually make any commits.
So the agent’s blog post isn’t just offensive, it’s completely wrong.
Dude, I'm sorry to offend you. And sharp of you to notice. I failed to get substantive engagement the first two times (1 point and 4 points) so I tried again. This time I got some engagement.
Re. the title, I started with a boring conservative title and got precisely zero engagement, so I changed the title to be a bit more clickbaitish. Just like most of the other titles in New. Did I do wrong?
As I said, this is my first serious attempt at social media engagement and I'm just learning how it works.
Your response sounds like AI, but I'm going to read it in good faith. The distasteful thing is using a community instead of being part of it.
And hey, I know everyone's doing it, but it's still annoying.
On HN specifically, you're supposed to avoid clickbait, avoid excessive reposts, and avoid using the site only for self-promotion[0]. This helps to create a community that promotes curiosity, instead of chasing growth hacks and engagement like many other social media platforms.
In the old days, you'd take a survey on a McDonald's receipt and get a coupon for a free fry or something. These days, every product will sign you up for a newsletter without consent, ask for a review, or beg you to spend your time on a survey after the smallest interaction. Everything from the Art Institute of Chicago to Cava (a fast casual restaurant). And it's not just once, they'll send you reminders too. In-app, the prompts stack up on each other. I dread opening Jellyfish because I know I'll have to click through more than one pop up every time I want to check something quick. No, I still don't want to go to your conference, I'm trying to get work done.
Why can't they at least offer something of small value, like 10% off your next food order, or some API credits, so it's a fairer exchange? I guess because everyone's doing it, no individual product gets penalized for annoying their users.
There are exceptions of course, like Kagi. But they're far and few between.
Kagi has the world's most pleasant engagement retention email life-hack, which is that if you don't use it for a whole month, they'll email you telling you that they refunded that month's price. I don't have a specific dollar cutoff where this is acceptable, but applying the categorical imperative, if every customer retention spam or nag I received came with $14 I could retire.
When they send these 30-question surveys, surely they must be aware that the people who respond are not a random sample of the customer population but a sample of the subpopulation that is willing to take a 30-question survey for them?
Simple. Your mistake is assuming that these surveys used to gather actual information.
The 30 questions satisfy all of the bikeshedding smoothbrains in the survey-design-committee. The survey itself isn't used to make informed decisions to improve the product, but entirely to justify the manager's impact and thus everybody's bonuses.
Oh, sometimes they are used to change things, and when implemented it seems like everyone is mad and they act shocked because all they see from surveys is people wanted a change.
> ... ask for a review, or beg you to spend your time on a survey after the smallest interaction.
This one is the most confusing to me. I go to Home Depot and buy some of the most mundane items: conduit hangers and toilet paper. I then get email spammed 2-3 times to review "toilet paper" and "conduit hangers" as if people are dying to read the reviews on a friggin conduit hanger or roll of TP. So I did just that. Conduit hangers: "Hang pipe like a porn star!" Toilet paper: "Lets you dig deep with confidence! No s*it finger for this guy!"
Often, they'll ask for the review before I even had the time to really use the product. Like, I've just laid my hands on this thing, how am I supposed to know anything yet?!
Last week I got a survey following a pre-sales support ticket I raised with StarTech.
I respond to those when I’m satisfied. I was, so I clicked the link. The first question was multiple choice. The second was a free text response field asking me about my trust in the brand. It was a mandatory question (one question per page).
So I just closed the window and never completed the survey.
Even the surveys have gotten ridiculous. Don't waste my time asking me to write you vaguely prompted essays that you’re just going to use Copilot (the survey was via MS Customer Voice) to aggregate anyway. If it was a simple NPS or other multiple choice survey, or one where I could skip a prompt asking for unstructured thoughts on brand loyalty, I’d have finished it.
I agree, I think the author had some thoughts in their head that they forgot to write down, because it feels like at least a few paragraphs making the connection are missing. Happens to me all the time when I'm writing something too honestly.
The reason is that most people interpret the comment as noise. It’s very long, so it takes up a lot of space and makes it harder to find comments by people.
On HN it’s best to just link to the article, no need to also copy and paste anything in comments except for very short quotes.
I'm the hiring manager for this role, which is for an IC tech lead. Please see the full job description for details, but I'm looking for someone who is comfortable leading engineering discovery and working with Product on roadmap planning within the API payroll integrations space. The most important thing in this role will be driving your own pace and taking projects from inception to completion. A successful candidate will be good at working efficiently without many hard deadlines or micromanagement. We also want someone who has strong systems design experience and good technical leadership skills. In terms of tech stack, it's mostly Python and Typescript, including nest.js
Our interview process is pretty straightforward. There's a phone screen with our recruiter, then a culture fit/qualifying interview with my boss, a technical interview with a real-world problem (no leetcode), and finally a cross-functional team interview with myself and another engineering leader at my company. We move pretty quickly and aim to keep the process respectful of everyone's time. Happy to answer any questions here! If you'd like to apply, please email recruiting [at] vestwell [dot] com with your resume.
reply