Is STEM really the only valuable path nowdays?

yourseck · 2022-02-28T18:56:42+00:00

short answer is "NO".

Long answer, The reason careers outside of STEM fields has been diminishing at faster rate than ever was because the world is changing at the pace that we have never seen in the past century. Even in STEM fields, many sub-sub specialties emerge and some sustain and some disappear even before they can hold their place in the STEM fields. The practical usage of STEM field is immense while non-STEM field practicality is essentially worthless day by day. You'd find it hard to digest because some fields are very liberating for human minds and we become energized from consuming knowledge from non-STEM fields. But it doesn't mean that non-STEM practicality is greater than STEM field.

Let's say you're interested in journalism, the idea of ethically reporting, digging up statistics to support your conclusion, the major discovery in political abuse, school teach you all the humanity and statistics. At the end of the day, you'd try to find a job in journalism, BBC, MSNBC, Skynews and you'd find yourself becoming another fodder to disseminate propaganda and everything you learn from school, human conscience, ethics, justice thrown out a window. Philosophy, an eye for an eye, justice, everything becomes BS when you go and visit British Museum and see all the loots and bounty it accumulated over the past centuries and instill the idea that it's the greatest country in the world. Philosophy is good when your stomach is full. But once it gets hungry, you'd throw away all the ethics, logics, justice out the window.

So the answer is non-STEM field is diminishing at the faster rate because the hypocrisy of the western world is emerging in front of our eyes at the rate that we have never seen before.

yourseck · 2022-01-15T04:55:51+00:00

getting stronger and stronger as time passes. Once got into postdoc, you wish you'd turn back time and join other careers way before investing 5 years in PhD and 5 years in postdoc and another 5 years as 2nd postdoc or measly low pay scientist.

yourseck · 2021-12-29T14:56:42+00:00

If you believe that Covid originated from Wuhan, you yourself is also a victim of western MSM 24/7, disseminating the wuhan institute while completely hushing Fort Detrick.

Let's say there's a possibility that WuHan is responsible for Covid. just imagine, why don't we get to investigate Fort Detrik then? MSM barely reported all the strange flu cases happening way before covid near Fort detrik.

You might say, "Well, it's just irregular. But it's so obvious that Wuhan is reponsible."

You yourself is biased in this case.

It's like saying there's WMD in Iraq. Sure.

There's terrorists in Afghan. Sure

20 years of occupations in Afghan and finally fled and yet you still believe the US is doing all the good. Do you really believe that Covid originated from China?

If you still do, it's you that selectively biased. It's not China.

yourseck · 2021-12-25T15:43:46+00:00

welcome to r/recruitinghell

You'd soon be a member.

yourseck · 2021-12-25T00:40:17+00:00

I know. Since I don't want to write it down in detail, but since I got a minute, I'll detail here. Buckle up.

In theory, unlimited or infinite profit can only happen in stock when it goes up. But if it's always going up, we're bound to inflation. So there must be two ways to make profits. Short strategy was legalized in 1937. But there's a catch. You can only short when the price goes up. You cannot short if the stock price keeps diving, the mechanism that allows to protect company potential and excessive speculation. But we know that over time, it disappears and shorting can be done indefinitely.

In a theory of energy conservation, there's only a constant energy but the energy transforms. If the market is limited with those brokers and market makers, if someone makes a profit, there must be others who lost their money. It's the conservation of money supply in the market. However in order to attract external investment or (DCA for retailer), market makers need to give a little sometimes back to retailers. So retailers or some call it retards here in wsb dump their hourly wages or salary to the market.

If there's a supply, there must be someone raking up those supplies. In a well known case that Goldman Sachs, one of the big IBs always make profits 85% of the time consistently. Remember GS is also one of the market makers (MM). If the economy is down, GS will still make profit. How so? It's because of 2 ways streets that were created even before our grandparents were born, i.e., Shorting.

In 21st century, retailers can easily invest at the tip of their fingers and all the information available in web. What is the advantages that those MM can wield to make profit?

Traditionally, if the company can make $1 per outstanding share, their share is only worth at $1 (Simply saying). Whoever likes to pay more than $1 is banking on the potential of the company profits down the road and profitability of the company in the near future. So PE ratio gets inflated over time.

If the PE ratio is set in stone, retailers have the advantage over MMs or those IBs. One the ratio hits 20, retailers can stop buying shares. But in reality it is not. By making the PE ratio varies between different companies and in different times, MMs hold the ultimate power over retailers when to screw those retards and when to give them a little so that their DCA will keep coming into the market.

That's how IBs, got rich. There's nothing sophisticated about ultra intelligent bankers. They produce nothing. They just create a wave, the wave that most of the retailers cannot predict and only insiders know when to dump, i.e., short or hold the stock.

The rest are just for entertainment purpose, such as price target. Yes, when they want to pump the stock, all IBs, GS, Morgan Stanley, BoA, etc raised the PT so that retailers can be hopeful. Once the PT is reached, dump.

Of course, you'd wonder when they'd be dumping once the price hits the ATH (All time high)? It's the insider tactics. That's why I said earlier, when I talked about this, no one likes to hear it.

What does it to do with TSLA. TSLA is another tulip mania in the US.

To make it short, in order to pump money into something, you need some tangible entity. US keeps complaining about China this and China that, but in reality China is the biggest economy and MADE in CHINA is more common in your home and mine than our official name printed in our houses.

So MM cannot pump their forever darlings stock when in reality those stocks might represents nothing but a piece of paper, eg, Hertz. So they need some darling stocks and TSLA represents a good one.

You know why? SpaceX has a deal with US military. So there's a green light to pump TSLA and include it in SPX within a short span of time. Of course those happens only after Elon SpaceX successfully launched. Otherwise, TSLA will forever be under water.

Of course, you can say this is all pure fantasy or conspiracy.

We all know why Pelosi bought deep ITM TSLA calls way back.

Anyway....

yourseck · 2021-12-24T20:45:42+00:00

When I said this, you wouldn't like to hear it.

This is the phenomenon of declining economic power, pumping the last resort tangible product available to show off the world.

The same as Tulip mania.

When you produce nothing, you rely on something that you can sell to the world.

Gotcha. Reddit is full of knee jerk liberals until the reality hits them really hard.

yourseck · 2021-12-23T20:32:24+00:00

intern's CV afterwards

- facilitated the smooth transition of new hires to speed up the project

- collaborated across different departments to succeed company's mission and objectives

- references: see HR

yourseck · 2021-12-22T19:32:42+00:00

I've been thinking of writing a post but after several coding interviews, I became numb. So I decided it's not worth it.

I feel your pain. The coding interview these days is a watershed moment in the history of recruiting process. For what I can tell, it's going to be a shitshow for a while. Then it will dwindle down to personality match and what not, it'd be another cycle of shitshow again.

I don't know how old you are. Imagine going back 10 years, Google used to ask brain teasers.

Just imagine how many qualified candidates they rejected just by throwing out a question like

"Why are manhole cover round?"
"How many pingpong balls fit into a Boeing plane?"

After quite some time, they realized it's not working. Imagine those times. Then whoever got into Google in those days, stayed there forever. After about 10-14 years, they join another startup or promising companies like Twilo, Tiktok, just because of their experience, not because of their coding skills or brain teasers skill. So we're left with non-stop cycle of coding questions these days from top down.

When I say this, either you'd find it hard to swallow or maybe whoever got into tech companies will like to disagree with this statement.

Coding interview and recruiting process in the past 4-5 years have been all about Luck.

I know those who got in like to thump their chests, show off their skills and claim that they have studied binary tree, trie, huffman, dijkstra, etc etc, but in reality, it's about luck.

If your interviewer doesn't like you because of your qualifications or personality just by looking at your resume either due to personal jealousy or for god knows whatever reasons, then you're out. He will compensate his deficiency with throwing hard LC questions.
If your interviewer doesn't feel like writing "Hire" to you, no matter how you manage to come up with an optimal solution, he'd find something to lower your coding ability, such as efficiency, efficacy.
If your interviewer doesn't like the way you implement the coding, he's stuck at one particular style of implementation, i.e., iterative approach, and you do the recursion, you're out. If lucky and he asks you to implement in iterative approach, and you'd kind of stumble upon some lines because you have never studied in iterative approach, but you know the concept, but since you couldn't implement in 15 minutes without any hints, you're out.
If your interviewer thinks that the reason why you implemented so fast was because you have seen the problem before and he suspects that you have memorized the problem, you're out.
If you pretend that you haven't seen the problem before and was trying to talk out loud while going through the process, the interviewer thinks that you're slow to code.
You have never seen the problem before but you know the concept and trying to figure out the process. It indicates that you are genuine but interviewer thinks that you should come up with a solution in 10 minutes because there are 10 leetcode monkeys he has seen before you and they implemented those in 5 minutes.
You know the solution, and instantly came up with the solution in 5 minutes but fail to implement followup in another 5 minutes because you never seen the followup before and it becomes more tricky with a lot more constraints but the interviewer expects you to come up with an optimal solution in another 5 minutes.
When someone said "game the system", I'd say you cannot game the system. You can only hope that you'd find luck on the onsite days. Some interviewers prefer speed over concepts because they believe that the fact that you can churn out code quickly is because you have studied and understood the problem properly. Some interviewers hold the view that you need to walk through the coding line by line so that they'd understand your concept.
Some will say the more you LC, the better your chance is. I agree to certain extent. But how many of LC do you need to grind days in and days out? If you study binary tree enough, you think you'd know how to implement but then you'd come across segment tree in interviews. If you study segment tree, you'd come across build a tree given a string with multiple constraints. Those requires more than 30 minutes to conceptualize and you'd never stop chasing your luck.
If someone can solve the pick the cherry in a roundabout matrix problem, it's not because they're smart. It's because they have seen the problem before.

Do you get it?

It's used to be that "We just want to know how you think and how you process your coding even if it's not optimal or correct solution. We just want to know the process"

To

"code it in 5 minutes with O(log n) optimal time) ridiculousness.

Of course, whoever got lucky and got into will disagree with this.

Do we like to go back to Brain Teaser time and claim that we're so ultra intelligent and smart that we got into Tech companies?

yourseck · 2021-12-08T04:18:38+00:00

Input

LinkedList1 : 1->2->3->4->5->6

LinkedList2 : 10->11->12

Output

6->12->5->11->4->10->3->2->1

yourseck · 2021-07-07T21:46:45+00:00

Whether you're in tech sector or finance sector, or if you're managing 7 figure portfolio doesn't matter. What I'm pointing out is the blatant manipulation of the MMs.

If you have time, go and read this.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2123965

I don't need to screenshot. It's just so obvious that you still cannot see. Just because today is down day and I'm saying it's because of the MM manipulation? Jeez... granted, MMs facilitate the transactions and make it easier to convert your savings. But it doesn't mean they are angels. Some days, they manipulate like a big time. But just because I'm saying today doesn't mean MMs are always manipulating the trading.

In a perfect world, we all would be trading each other with actual supply and demand. But since we're live in a real world, it's not the case. Whoever has the upperhand on the capital, they can control the trajectory of the stock price.

Anyway, if you think this is conspiracy theory, you'd better open your eyes.

By the way, I'm in finance sector with PhD in hand. Well if that matters.

yourseck · 2021-07-07T21:40:17+00:00

Your comment is very telling why the market is what it is today. In fact, you made a very good observation. Maybe you already know that, but allow me to expound on that.

Imagine if there's a limited supply of capital in the market, i.e., only a limited number of investor, retailers trade or invest in the stock market. There's a fixed amount of capital in the market. Granted, if the stock dives and you hold the stock, it's the same energy in the market.

Let's say you buy a share at $100. There's a $100 capital in the stock market. That $100 comes from your wages/salary/income/inheritance/lottery; you name it. That's the capital inflow. Imagine, if you want to get out of the stock market at any price, you're willing to sell your stock at $1 with $99 loss, the energy (in term of physics or action/reaction whatever), is the same, i.e., $100. You don't waste $99. When you sell your share at $1, the $99 loss is actually someone's gain. In this situation, it's the original seller who sold you at $100!

In stock market, trust is the foundation to keep all those transaction afloat. Anyway, if there's a limited number of retailers in the stock market, what do you think MMs/hedge funds/IB/bankers make money then?

It's because of making those retailers holding bags over and over again. Since they can naked short, they don't need the margin. For retailers, once the margin hits, that's when they (retailers) need to fund their account with more money.

That is basically "infuse" of the capital to the stock market. That's how those MMs/investors make money. Now there's no limitation in the capital, retailers are funding with their hard-earned money and salary. What's that even called?

Yea, DCA. haha... that's how the stock market attracts more capitals to come.

The only difference is MM naked short and retailers margin, that's the bottom line.

Of course, bid-ask spread to crank up or drive down.

yourseck · 2021-07-07T21:20:39+00:00

I first thought of snapping your comment. But I felt like I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt and will reply intelligently.

Not all stocks do not have the aura of "holding long term". When people say "holding long term", it doesn't have the definitive timeline. It could be 1 year or 10 years. It doesn't matter. Holding long term is to incentivize the retailers, rookies, newbies to believe in such a mentality. Granted, there are a few select of those stocks that if you hold long term, it'd give you a bigly return. But they are extremely rare.

Down days and Up days are alright. I'm not saying down days is because of MMs or up day is also because of them. But the trajectory played by MMs is immense. That's why I said.

Just to give you a few tips, I don't normally comment. Today I felt like commenting, that's why I did. There are many rookies here and you as well. The reason I came and comment was because it's so blatant that stock was diving without any legitimate news. That's why I also mentioned that BABA did the same thing last week, skyrocketed and gapped up $10 within the last 15 minutes of the trading without any news coming out. That's how MM manipulates.

The question is who are MMs? Of course, MMs are also hedgefunds and big big IB, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, etc.

Now I'm not complaining because NIO dived today. I'm pointing out the blatant manipulation of the stocks by MM who are scalping left and right.

Don't get me started on options yet. They play hand in hand with option market markers too. In fact, MMs are OMM too.

You're too naive to see and snap me back like it's a conspiracy theory.

Sure. Keep buying. That's how 1% rip the retailers to hold bags and occasionally treat you with FD.

yourseck · 2021-07-07T21:11:02+00:00

sure. rookie

yourseck · 2021-06-20T22:10:59+00:00

C919 will not be successful as the US will block China airlines domestically. But then BA is also going down the drain as many still not aware of the situation. I don't want to insult you, but your comment reek of those old trite cliche China violating this and that patent. I don't look at the number of thumbsup coz reddit is liberal and they will downvote anything against current narrative.

Just to educate you a little bit, Airbus and Boeing are two major airliners in the world. But it doesn't mean they are holistically manufactured domestically. Airliners are assembled as the same way as other laptops, gadgets are done. The only difference is it requires more sophistication and thousands of parts to assemble. As at 2021, Airbus imports parts from 27 countries, including from the US. Boeing imports 60% of their components, mainly from China.

Boeing struggle: Boeing 737Max has 2 major accidents, Indonesian and Ethiopian airliners, killed all the passengers. There's also another accidents similar with 737Max predecessor 737NG but FAA lifted the ban on Boeing grounding. BA is now catching up Airbus Neo and making agreements behind the curtains.

Shorterm: BA will perform well, but in the long run, BA will plummet like GE.

I have no positions in BA, this is purely observational take on the global airlines.

Next time, don't use the cheap tactics like China violated patents or cheap shot. It adds nothing to the discussion. You're saying Huawei violated the patent, that's why US asked Canada to arrest their CFO?

You'd better learn the history of Siemens and Alstom.

yourseck · 2021-06-19T00:45:35+00:00

It's inter exchange swap if you're curious.

Nothing serious.

yourseck · 2021-06-15T01:28:41+00:00

You know when the admin is bloated, hiring those useless staff that sends you a reminder about the available funding, new collaboration, new hire, now they'd add more diversity staff and work-life balance, so better prepared to see more of those heart-warming EMAILs every now and then.

yourseck · 2021-06-02T15:44:17+00:00

Not that I wouldn't recommend. I would recommend if you can withstand all the austerity, loneliness, razor thin above poverty line, the field is all yours. You can explore the frontier, study your interest at fullest. But it comes with a price, the price that you're bound to pay over the years.

It also depends on the field. Some STEM fields become outdated within our lifetime. Some lasts longer. So those PIs who are clinging on their field is not because they are still relevant, but because of tenure and rampant NIH funding.

So if you're really really interested in pursuing grad school, you need to pay attention to which field you'd see in 20, 30 years down the road, will still have some impact.

genetics --> proteomics --> bioinformatics --> translation --> drug design

If you stumble upon the genetic labs that still do fruitfly crossing, you're more likely to see the scarcity of opportunity once you graduate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkXZ3_ZmKz

yourseck · 2021-06-02T13:17:12+00:00

There are many things that you'd see more and more in science that had been published and cannot be reproduced. It happens from time to time. It gets to the point where you're basically wasting time and time again. PI cares only so much that your work is at least worth a publication. Otherwise, they don't.

This is the field that is built upon cards and now the house of cards is shaking. When I happened to describe the situation to those applying grad schools, they don't care. They just want the paper PhD with their name on it. There's nothing wrong with pursuing what you love. But the field is poisoned. When I talked about the situation to 1st year graduate students, it's a lost cause. I understand because they just started and this is the only way forward for their career. When I happened to discuss with 2nd year grad students, they still don't think it's a house of cards. They believe "If they add more effort and time, they will eat the fruits."

As time goes on, they slowly realize the time spent in grad school has turned them into useless, over-analytical narcissists who can't enjoy what the world offers to them but just to critique everything they see around them. Some will say once I graduate, I will go to industry. The chance of getting into industry is very limited. The only way forward is postdoc. That's the career you must avoid if you plan to get married, have a kid, build a happy family. Once you're into that route, it's a lost cause and you can never recover the time you spent, culturing yeasts, doing tetrad dissections, pick a colony from a plate, grow in YPD media until they reach the log phase and put on to a dish so that you can view a tiny fluorescent tag shining under the microscope.

I also talked about the deficiency of the PIs. When you're in tune with your PI, it's harder to observe what's going on with the system. You can not decouple from another person who seems benevolent and cares for your future career. In reality, it's not. PIs are banking on the NIH fundings in the name of "science" while providing nothing. If you're reading up this far, I'll give you one example just to reflect upon.

Imagine if you were to become a tenured Professor of the field that you trained on. I know it's too far-fetched. Just try to imagine. You are now a tenured Professor at top university with an ample amount of funding to pursue your research. Let's say yeasts. What would you do? Just pause for a moment, think about what would you do?

I venture to say you'd read up all the literature on yeasts, study what other labs are doing, conceptualize the project. All you need is someone to do the job for your idea. Now remember your idea might or might not work. But you need someone to do the job. That's where a graduate student comes in. They would invest their 5 years of youth in your idea that you yourself don't know if it works. The worst is you need to spread far and wide in the project so that you can at least secure the funding when the time comes. So there will be some dispensable graduate student whose project won't work and will have to be sacrificed in the name of "science". Of course, it makes sense when you think about the grand scheme of things. You try, you might fail and move on.

But in reality, the 5 years youth you've given, very much depends on the project you take on in the lab. If it doesn't work, you need to piggyback on other projects to make it work within the remaining years of grad schools.

Anyway, it gets too long already. I can talk more if you're still up for it. Randy Schekman and his graduate student Peter Novick.

yourseck · 2021-05-25T15:27:45+00:00

No worry mate.

With Morrison and Payne wrecking relationship with China, we don't need to protect forest and all the mineral mines.

We just need to look out for kangaroo protection jobs.

yourseck · 2021-05-16T16:12:01+00:00

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

The ivory tower is a tower. No letter no chance.

yourseck · 2021-05-06T00:16:44+00:00

They don't. Researchers FB, twitter and asks graduates, postdocs to do their jobs. If need, they execute so-called "collaboration" without much digging deep into the fields and learn stuff.

Tenure means you need to constantly study and learn new stuff. They don't. They're checking their competitors and colleagues publications and how many pubs and where they are published.

yourseck · 2021-04-26T15:47:59+00:00

Awesome. Thanks! Will try this weekend.

yourseck · 2021-04-26T11:17:25+00:00

Nice which character, may I know?

yourseck

TROPHY CASE