|
| ▲ | margalabargala 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| If you thought about it for two weeks beforehand and came up with nothing, I have trouble lending much credence to that. |
| |
| ▲ | qt31415926 2 days ago | parent [-] | | the commenter never said they came up with nothing, they said o3 came up with something better. |
|
|
| ▲ | lossolo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So 10 years at a FANG company, then it’s 15 years in backend at FANG, then 10 years in distributed systems, and then running interviews at some company for 5 years and rising capital as founder in NYC. Cool. Can you share that chat from o3? |
| |
| ▲ | themanmaran 2 days ago | parent [-] | | How are those mutually exclusive statements? You can't imagine someone working on backend (focused on distributed systems) for 10-15 years at a FANG company. And also being in a position to interview new candidates? | | |
| ▲ | HAL3000 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Who knows but have you read what OP wrote? "I just used o3 to design a distributed scheduler that scales to 1M+ sxchedules a day. It was perfect, and did better than two weeks of thought around the best way to build this." Anyone with 10 years in distributed systems at FAANG doesn’t need two weeks to design a distributed scheduler handling 1M+ schedules per day, that’s a solved problem in 2025 and basically a joke at that scale. That alone makes this person’s story questionable, and his comment history only adds to the doubt. | | |
| ▲ | thelambentonion 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > and his comment history only adds to the doubt for others following along: the comment history is mostly talking about how software engineering is dead because AI is real this time with a few diversions to fixate on how overpriced university pedigrees are. | | |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [deleted] |
