[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 days ago

He literally told it to give the answer "in km". That's on him, not Bing.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I spent about a year looking for a job (senior management in cybersecurity), and had basically ZERO luck until I got wise and did the following. Had a new role within 4 months afterwards.

  1. Take your resume, and expand it 10-20x into a massive document listing every single project, accomplishment, or skill you can think of that could ever be potentially relevant in a new role.
  2. Every time you apply to a new job, copy the job posting into a ChatGPT conversation, and have it edit your resume to a 1-2 page document that only includes the experience most relevant to the job posting, and to rewrite sentences to use the exact terminology from the job posting where appropriate.
  3. Once you have the custom resume, use ChatGPT to generate a custom cover letter to include as well.

These 2 changes will cause your resume to get assigned a higher "relevance score" by the AI tool their HR or recruiting team uses to weed through the 400+ applications they receive, which means you'll be at the top of the list of names that gets delivered to first human in the process (the recruiter).

You'll actually start getting callbacks and phone screens at that point, which gives you a fighting chance. The rest is up to you.

There are paid services that'll do this for you (like Teal), but you can do it yourself and with more control as long as you have access to ChatGPT. If you can generate a completely customized resume and cover letter in less than 2 minutes, you can pump out 10 high-quality applications in less than half an hour per day.

Edit: I see you're getting a 40% response rate. You may be setting your sights too low if that remains consistent. If you're applying for roles that are a solid step up form where you're at, you would expect closer to a 10% response rate.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 30 points 4 weeks ago

Not relevant. Trump voters don't care about reality, while the rest of us do. If the Democrats want to be the party of sane, responsible voters they'll need to put up a sane, responsible candidate.

Be better than Republicans.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago

ITT: A bunch of folks who didn't read the article.

The article didn’t say young people were doing worse than before, which it seems like all of you assumed.

The reason the study found for why youth is no longer one of the “happiest times” is because they showed that people only do better and better as they age. So whereas before your youth would be comparatively happier to your 'mid-life crisis', they’re saying that crisis doesn't occur anymore and we just get happier and happier into midlife and old age. So your younger days didn't get worse, they just aren't as great in comparison because the rest of your life gets so much better as time goes on.

Sounds crazy, I know. But that's what the article was actually saying.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 month ago

45 minutes outside of Portland, OR in any direction will get you somewhere just as rural as the place you left in SC, only with better weather and sane laws.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 57 points 2 months ago

Veritasium is YouTube propaganda. It's well documented - Derek takes sponsor money and gets people killed in the process. I blocked Derek on all platforms the day Tom put this documentary video out.

-15
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by blaine@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

Considering Kamala Harris’s fitness to take over from Joe Biden should the need arise, a top aide to the former California senator’s 2020 campaign said: “This person should not be president of the United States.”

Harris saw heavy staff turnover, with aides describing a toxic climate riven with factionalism and mismanagement. One source who worked for the vice-president declined to go on record or even discuss matters anonymously, due to the heated atmosphere around the office.

“They refused to characterise the experience of working for Harris, apart from offering a three-word assessment. It was, they said: ‘Game of Thrones’.”

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 18 points 7 months ago

Isn't this a pretty standard practice across the world? If someone has extensive ties to and/or sympathies for a specific regime, they'll be more susceptible to coercion and compromise by that regime. Why purposely put them in the place where they are most likely to be coerced and/or compromised?

You have to weigh the benefit (their familiarity with local perspectives and customs) against the cost (increased risk of counter-intel failures).

There's a reason Starfleet sends Captain Picard far away to the Romulan border when the Borg are attacking Earth. Or am I missing something?

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 21 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I tried this once. Went to the dog park, chatted up a girl over a period of a month. I finally got the courage to ask her on a date, and she said yes! The date (dinner and a local concert) went great - we ended up back at my place and I can honestly say it was some of the best sex of my life.

Then she ghosted me and we never talked again. That was 2017, and I'm still not over it. Thanks for the advice though.

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 38 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

There are only five sentences of text on that page, with the last one explaining that this sort of marriage was not common at all. Where did you get the idea that the textbook is suggesting that this was the norm?

[-] blaine@lemmy.ml 20 points 7 months ago

Nobody is going to vote for Trump because of this. But it WILL cause enough folks to get dejected and not vote at all, and that's all it'll take for Trump to win. Democrats need a candidate people can be excited about voting for, or they WILL lose.

The "but the other guy is worse!" approach won't work this time.

view more: next ›

blaine

joined 9 months ago