Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

zipcpu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#71

Post by curiousgal »

geofft wrote: post #65
SalamandersRUs wrote: post #14

If you found this article interesting, I'd recommend this article by the same author: https://zipcpu.com/blog/2020/11/26/zipcpu-biz.html > On another team I worked with, I was asked to call a man by female pronouns. This one brings me more grief, as I enjoyed working with the individual in question. He wanted to declare himself to be a woman. He changed his name, his clothing, his looks, his dress, you name it. While…

I was wondering why this guy was a one-person company when, apparently, his time is overcommitted and it's a buyer's market for FPGA engineers according to him. Now I understand.

He also indicated that the man in question was Indian which is very curious given his mindset.

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#73

Post by umvi »

unishark wrote: post #69
Ostrogodsky wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has a lot of red-flags: - Bringing over and over again that "he was an official of the US army" - the "you didnt reject me, I reject you" spiel, although this part was hilarious to be fair,for being so childish. - The part when "he bit his tongue" before answering to the kid. What does he think he had to answer? - The "one person Christian company" thing And I got bored, he sounds like a "Prima-Donna" too. The pos…

It was the air force. And anyone who can graduate from an engineering program (and lacks a drug-use history or whatever probably) can probably qualify for that. They recruit pretty aggressively at universities. He did make an unnecessarily-specific statement about being a lt. colonel at one point, but I don't know that it's a hard rank to get to. I though it was more the point at which career officers got stuck.

Yeah Lt. Col is fairly easy to reach if you "do your time". Colonel is much more difficult and requires a bit of luck and General is impossible unless you have General friends (seriously, you'll never make general unless another general grooms you and vouches for you)

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#74

Post by megamindbrian2 »

spear wrote: post #70
wyldfire wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would worry that a young Earth creationist might make a poor designer. Someone who might ignore the evidence of a design error in favor of some other interpretation not supported by evidence. Why did the deity put the fossils there? In order to confuse us? In order to challenge the faithful? It defies reason. You can only put it as a mystery of faith. But it needn't be.

In my first HW design job out of college, I was very surprised when a senior engineer made that exact claim -- that God planted dinosaur fossils in the ground. I knew he was very religious and I could tell he was quite serious, but it was long ago and I had never heard of Young Earth Creationism, so I was shocked into silence. (Also, he was my manager and I decided I couldn't afford to argue.)

Lol, it wasn't God, it was Jews trying to confuse Christians.

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#75

Post by shkkmo »

wyldfire wrote: post #33
jasonhansel wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From another post: https://zipcpu.com/blog/2018/10/04/welcome.html > My Christian beliefs are centered around a literal interpretation of the Bible. This includes a belief in a 6-day creation that took place roughly six-thousand years ago, a belief that God will cause the end of this world rather than any man-induced climate change, a firm belief that a free people should be an armed people, and more. Ouch.

I would worry that a young Earth creationist might make a poor designer. Someone who might ignore the evidence of a design error in favor of some other interpretation not supported by evidence. Why did the deity put the fossils there? In order to confuse us? In order to challenge the faithful? It defies reason. You can only put it as a mystery of faith. But it needn't be.

I always thought the most plausible explanation is one developed Terry Pratchett in "Strata":

If you are going to create a planet (or universe) from scratch to be the home of an intelligent species, including a realistic history is critical to give that species sufficient historical context to learn about how things work.

Understanding evolution and biology is a lot harder if you have no fossil record. Understanding plate tectonics is a lot harder if you don't have a consitent geologix record. Understanding physics is a lot harder if you don't have a light coming in from events that predates the creation of the universe.

Thus if you grant that the universe was created 7000 years ago with a huge, detailed and consistent history, the clear implication to me is that we are intended to study that history to understand the universe in which we exist.

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#76

Post by phendrenad2 »

This guy is a bit out of touch with reality. He apparently works on his own as digital design debugging consultant, meaning he likely hasn't worked for larger firms. If he did, he'd know that at most hardware design companies, there's a pretty clear split between design and verification, and people simply don't bother learning the skills necessary to do both. He can bluster on about how HIS consultancy has benefitted from his ability to do both, yeah we get it man, but you're a one-man shop. Specialization, have you heard of it?

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#77

Post by lnsru »

W-Stool wrote: post #36

I guess I'll be the first to say it - does the author of the article strike anyone as a bit of a pretentious asshole? Downvote away if you have to, but I just thought someone needed to say that.

I upvoted you. Verification engineer and design engineer are sadly 2 different things. I could do both, but I don’t like e and specman for verification and wouldn’t take verification job. Plus this guy is ex-army, I worked with few of this kind. Their people and technology skills were rudimentary. Army is very hierarchical and nobody questions dumb tasks. Sadly engineers do and become Prima Donnas. I can’t deny, that difficult individuals exist, but that’s how real world works. There are no groups in my flour without famous jerk in it in big Corp I work for.

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#78

Post by sascha_sl »

vmception wrote: post #27
SalamandersRUs wrote: post #14

If you found this article interesting, I'd recommend this article by the same author: https://zipcpu.com/blog/2020/11/26/zipcpu-biz.html > On another team I worked with, I was asked to call a man by female pronouns. This one brings me more grief, as I enjoyed working with the individual in question. He wanted to declare himself to be a woman. He changed his name, his clothing, his looks, his dress, you name it. While…

For those having trouble with this, the consensus within inclusionary groups in the US is that sex and gender are separate concepts. Meaning that males can be recognized as males and females as females, no matter what their pronouns are, as that is sex. Gender is not intrinsically tied to those, so gendered words like “man, woman” and “he, she” can be dynamic and up to the individual to identify as. The consensus on…

Also, HRT changes many of the factors we simplify to “sex”, based on it changing all sex-based gene expression. So while you can’t literally change to “the other” sex these people rather exist outside the simplified classification.

Not that anyone but your doctor should care.

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#79

Post by jimbob45 »

FormhellFrom wrote: post #50
jimbob45 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything starts with a “simple ask”. If it’s so small and simple, then why are we being fought tooth-and-nail over it? There is no consensus either, outside of a small minority. Prior to 2012, custom pronouns would have had you laughed out of the room. You don’t get to redefine language and force your linguistic preferences on others. That’s not how language works.

> You don’t get to redefine language and force your linguistic preferences on others. That’s not how language works. you literally do and that’s literally how language works. You are free to disagree with these new definitions, and in turn people are free to show you the door, just like what occurred in the post above. (What’s the alternative? Words are given a fixed definition at their conception? Who gives these de…

The alternative is that linguistic preferences aren't forced upon others?

Re: The FPGA Designer Who Didn't Get the Job

#80

Post by neolog »

thebooktocome wrote: post #40
jimbob45 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything starts with a “simple ask”. If it’s so small and simple, then why are we being fought tooth-and-nail over it? There is no consensus either, outside of a small minority. Prior to 2012, custom pronouns would have had you laughed out of the room. You don’t get to redefine language and force your linguistic preferences on others. That’s not how language works.

> You don’t get to redefine language and force your linguistic preferences on others. That’s not how language works. I don't particularly care about rehashing the ethics of preferred pronouns right now, but what you've described is exactly how language works. You might look into why standard practice moved away from capitalizing nouns in the 19th century.

> why standard practice moved away from capitalizing nouns in the 19th century.

I can't find any reason on google. Got a link?

Post reply on HN