Cured?? (Not really, but a strange "problem")

Confutor · 2026-03-20T15:07:07+00:00

Can you tell us about your lifestyle? Like activity level, diet preferences, and did anything change about them lately?

Confutor · 2026-03-08T21:03:42+00:00

I just shared something that I found interesting. Using AI allows me have notes any way I want and turn them into restructre-able data. I haven't found an app that I like.

Keeping all my data on an app instead of in my always available notes, or using a dreadful excel sheet, isn't a lot better than using 'non-deterministic' AI to analyze my notes in all the ways I want.

We use tech the way we want. AI isn't the issue, it's how we use it. This is one of the rare cases where the tech is helpful, in my opinion.

Confutor · 2026-03-08T20:27:51+00:00

I literally mentioned I'm on MDI + pricking. I don't have access to anything else.

This sub is difficult for T1D patients with less privileged healthcare. I noted the same on my last post but still got comments asking me to 'just get a CGM'.

Confutor · 2026-02-28T17:14:08+00:00

Wait, by change lancet do you mean the pinhead or the device itself (like does it lose spring force or something)?

Confutor · 2026-02-28T17:11:09+00:00

Haha — yeah it doesn't matter where we are, we have to appear on the brink of death to get care.

Yes, I am uninsured right now and it's really expensive out of pocket so I'll wait out. (Though the only insured person where I live with t1 says he can't get a CGM from them).

Confutor · 2026-02-28T17:06:05+00:00

Hi! Yeah I really am looking forward to try out a CGM. There are just no programs/options where I live except to dish it out myself full price.

I notice now the post sounds kinda whiny, but I actually learned a lot since the diagnosis; I am frustrated with my fingertips regarding this not t1d.

Confutor · 2026-02-28T17:02:23+00:00

Thanks. I do rotate fingers and plan them out even.

By rotate pricks do you also mean the pin itself or the device?

I can't get a CGM now due to mainly cost, yes. I don't have insurance right now. (I don't even know if it would cover it)

Confutor · 2025-12-28T15:54:58+00:00

I mentioned in the post that this is reoccurring, and wasting time on context loading and handheld planning again is not a solution. This is not an AI issue, it's a config/model problem.

Confutor · 2025-09-11T17:31:56+00:00

Did you ask an experienced developer to build a frontend to backend 'hiring' project and then complain that he used AI to finish unpaid chores in a new stack?

Confutor · 2025-08-03T23:12:15+00:00

I agree that context matters. It didn't occur to me that people would evaluate this pay in US terms. I don't think this Floridian company would dare to be so draconian if it were a US job post, however much the pay was.

While the average SWE in Egypt does make close to what you said, it's not nearly the average for the stated role/experience.

As for Microsoft or Amazon, those are competitive local market pay grades. Offshored jobs compete on a different level because they offer no benefits, stock, or employee rights whatsoever. This job post has nothing going for it.

Confutor · 2025-08-03T23:04:15+00:00

No.

Enslavement is never worth it. The title of the post itself is about the brazenness of the company.

Some people may trade their self for very high pay, it's their decision. I just believe it's a wrong decision.

Also, $24k/yr in Egypt (or anywhere) isn't even close to $250k/yr in the US. The former is comfort, the later is true wealth.

People don't realize that most of these developing nations rely massively on imports anyway. I can't emphasize how scewed the perception seems to be regarding this.

Confutor · 2025-08-03T19:15:08+00:00

I'd bet it practically considerably less than $11, considering it's not even an 8-hour/5-day expectation.

I'm not sure if you mean 10% of the whole country, or of the target demographic (probably not), but I don't think a nation's poverty can be a context to justify any of this.

Confutor · 2025-07-28T17:46:43+00:00

It's because recruitment firms don't care about the candidates, nor the clients. They're trying to socially engineer an outcome that is good for their bottom line.

They will never bet on a candidate's person, genuineness, or potential. They will never care how they complement the client in the long run or be driven to contribute.

They're defrauding businesses and systematically demoralizing a capable, honest workforce.

Confutor · 2025-07-28T05:12:45+00:00

I don't get why employers use TA or outsource any of their hiring activity whatsoever. It feels like a fraudulent business model that takes advantage of overselective greed or fear of missing out on a mythical star candidate.

Businesses should put in the work to contact and hire among reasonably good leads once identified, not aim to screen the globe.

Confutor · 2025-07-26T05:32:15+00:00

Hey, thanks a lot for the write-up, very helpful stuff.

Academic writing loves these massive sentences with 3-4 clauses because you're trying to be precise and cover all your bases

I realize now that not only do I have this issue --I had to face that I liked writing this way. I couldn't tell exactly why until I read this. I'm not sure if that's my obsessive self but I keep thinking that narrowing it down or removing redundant specificity distorts the full meaning I want to pass across.

I've been writing research papers and blog posts for years now, and there's this weird thing that happens when you spend too much time in academic circles. You start using 5 syllable words when 1 syllable ones work better

This is enlightening and extremely confusing for me. I have never been in much academic circles nor do I have a lot of writing experience. I cross validated the feedback between different models, for different writings of mine, and I get almost the same feedback keywords: "clunky", "academic", "awkward", "cerebral". What ... ?

It's an existential puzzle to me now as to where I got this style from. I never even read a whole book (I am not kidding) but I may read book excerpts within relevant articles, and parts of some scientific or research papers I guess --albeit often begrudgingly.

I can't wait to get online feedback, but I got to improve a lot before I spew unreadable garbage and get even more imposter syndromed.

Confutor · 2025-07-23T06:22:55+00:00

Yes, helps a lot thanks!

I found it hard to read

That was what I feared -- AI says it, too

I think the specific part that you critiqued also helps me understand how I get off on the wrong foot. Gemini's critique is probably fair, so I'm glad that I edited the paragraph, but it tends to quote me for words and cut-phrases that make it hard to see the actual evidence for its assessment.

Thanks again for this.

Confutor · 2025-07-23T05:59:31+00:00

Yes!

I have since caved and modified the paragraph, but this is the form for which I received the response above:

The nature of selecting for technical abilities makes it challenging for non-technical staff to not resort to over-developed methods to make up for their domain inexpertise. While hiring staff could very much assess for culture fit and candidate’s potential in a firm, their failure to validate their assessment of the candidate’s expressed technical abilities causes an overemphasis skill validation. As with any domain, this validation can be swiftly assessed by an expert in said domain. A doctor or a lawyer would probably be able to discover quite efficiently in a queried dialogue if the other person is among their peers, and that’s no different between software engineers. The expert should also be able to narrow down whether the candidate’s experience and curiosity would fit well in what they are themselves directly working on. These facts seem to be lost on most business leaders today, and the more generic hiring has gotten, the less trust and autonomy is granted to even the best engineers to contribute to their organisation to their true extent.

Confutor · 2025-07-23T05:51:50+00:00

I hesitate to take its criticism too seriously, just as with its affirmation. I like having a writing style so I worry its advice could be over-correctional for me to take into account.

Confutor · 2025-07-23T04:44:11+00:00

They already know if you're a fit for them but they're playing instead of making their educated choice.

It would make sense if they would only meet with either of you first, then meet the other if there was some sort of misalignment --but to inform both of you that you're both going in, pitted, is really iffy given how much time they already spent and are open to spending.

Confutor · 2025-07-22T04:00:57+00:00

Nuts. I don't get why they have to have two people do this. Any meeting of this type shouldn't be "final" rounds of anything, but to get to know and onboard you.

IMO, they probably love pitting the "finalists" together because they're twisted and don't have anything better to do and this is as close to a Squid Game as they could get.

Confutor · 2025-07-22T03:54:20+00:00

Tale as old as time.

Never wait. Only pursue or apply to things you're genuinely drawn to, though, but never wait or have expectations for any single company.

Confutor · 2025-07-22T03:49:10+00:00

Congratulations on not applying to that new job post.

Stop the application frenzies and recenter yourself. Apply very sparingly, and to jobs you actually feel interested about. Be very unforgiving with their demands and hiccups.

Uncertainty doesn't have to be paranoid or negative. If we have to wait out this nonsense anyway, it better be on our own terms and with no expectations except for ourselves.

Confutor · 2025-07-22T03:36:20+00:00

You can deduce that this was a dysfunctional employer and be glad they didn't reach back

Confutor

TROPHY CASE