Honestly, this is what I would do in your situation:

1. Update your resume and start responding to LinkedIn messages and possibly looking at least possibly.
2. Take those workshops for LLMs, there might be useful stuff to learn there, auto-completion, code search and examples of how to use certain features are very good uses of LLMs.
3. Don’t be overly vocal about it, but point at issues when you see them, e.g. those large messages that you’re expected to read point out how they’re way longer than need to be and how using LLMs to give you a summary said the wrong thing (even better if you have an actual example of this, by for example invoking TLDR bot or something similar on those messages every time they come up)
4. Look at code that was vibe coded in areas you’re working and start creating tickets for the stuff you see, unless they’re vetting everything the LLM produces (which would be slower than writing it yourself) there will be issues there, start documenting those. The thing most managers and other “AI enthusiasts” don’t get is that LLMs are trained with stack overflow and thousands of random GitHub projects written by inexperienced devs for every one good piece of code, so they have thousands of bad or incomplete examples for every good one. This means they end up not doing things like verifying you’re logged in to use an API, sanitize SQL queries, etc. Because when you ask how to do something in stack overflow you will get an answer that is not meant to be used literally things like `query = f"SELECT * FROM {table_name}"`` is an okayish example on how to build queries with validated data, but it’s a TERRIBLE example to use with user provided data, but the LLM doesn’t know that, it just copy pastes the code that gets things from a table where it needs it.
5. Prepare yourself, using LLM to write code has a short lifespan in most companies, but the damage takes twice as long to clean up. If you stay you will be seen as the naysayer and might even get fired for it, but eventually this will blow up so gigantically that they’ll start to regulate or even ban LLMs. And then there will be lots of garbage to clean up. In your shoes I might look elsewhere while possible as I wouldn’t want to be associated with the company that had all of their data leaked or similar, because if they’re using vibe code in prod it’s a matter of when.

Short answer, the masks would prevent them most of the time because they’re there exactly to prevent large blocks of continuous color as that would be difficult to recognize. Can you have small swastikas or other stuff in the middle? Yeah, but I don’t think anyone matters much about that. You can also purposefully create one but it will be hard to be read by a scanner and it’s likely going to be more random noise than anything useful.

Thanks, I’ve corrected the post

What do you mean unused bandwidth? Is that not the normal? Most of the time I’m not using my bandwidth so I guess I have lots of unused bandwidth too.

NFTs actually are an easy concept, a dollar bill is a Fungible Token, because all dollar bills are the same, you can change one for another and it all works out because both represent the same thing (one dollar). A deed to a house is not fungible, you can’t just change one deed for a different one because they represent different things. NFTs are just that, Non Fungible Tokens, why some people wanted to own a digital token representing ownership of a publicly available digital image is what can’t be explained.

It is called the tolerance paradox. If you want a truly tolerant society you can’t tolerate intolerance.

a) Explain why the US hasn’t gone back in so long,

Why would they? Nothing of value came from any of those missions and the risk is enormous.

and why with modern technology it seems so difficult? (especially given that NASA has been experiencing numerous delays in the Artemis missions, that certainly hasn’t given them a good impression…)

Because transistors are a lot more sensitive to EM than valves. Our current technology miniaturized lots of things, but that also means that a single piece of conductive material (like moon dust) or a single electron (from an em pulse) in the wrong place can wreak havok to it. Old computers required lots more electrons and space for their actual function so they were a lot more resistent to random variations. And we can’t make old computers anymore because we don’t have the factories for them, and you’re not going to create an entire factory just to produce a couple pieces for one mission, so they have to focus on isolating and making things more resistent.

b) How do you verify moon rocks without having actually been on the moon? How did scientists figure out what a moon rock looks like?

The moon is constantly being bombarded by unfiltered radiation because of its lack of atmosphere. This makes it so they’re composed of minerals that rarely occur on earth (they usually bind with oxygen or nitrogen in the atmosphere), have different isotopes (because of the radiation) and are much older (because no interference from tectonic movement/rain/wind/etc)

c) Why aren’t the old Apollo designs being reused for a moon landing? (by either the Americans or the Chinese)

Because they can’t for the same reason the US can’t, they don’t work with modern electronics, and no one can produce old electronics.

They say that there isn’t strong evidence either side (but believes that it is false, saying that “we will see” once someone else lands on the moon)

There is very strong evidence, your friend can corroborate for himself by spending a few thousand dollars (or he can understand that if anyone wanted to they could). First you need to buy a very powerful laser, then a very sensitive sensor, you hook them so they very close together and fire at the moon, you will never get a reading back, because the moon surface is a difuse reflector with a rough surface the light will scatter and go everywhere. However, when the astronauts went to the moon they left retroreflectors in specific locations, so if you pointed at one of those you would get the signal back approximately 2.5 second later.

And what other points can I bring up to definitively say, yes, the moon landing wasn’t faked?

I guess it’s easier to ask them “what evidence would convince you” because the answer will be none, of there was any evidence that would convince them they would have been convinced already.

Another thing, they also can’t believe that astronauts could bring and ride the little moon buggies. I am also partially interested in how that was achieved to be honest!

Not sure what’s there to not understand about this, so I’ll just say same way cars get to a dealership and you ride them afterwards.

There are several criticisms I could make to the methodology and other parts of this study (and there are LOTS to make here). But let’s for a moment assume it is correct, let’s imagine that vaccines really do cause a 250% risk increase to ADHD or asthma. Even if that were true (which it isn’t, for example: almost every person diagnosed with ADHD has an undiagnosed parent with it too, leading to the conclusion that it’s not that the cases have increased but that diagnosis has.) vaccines would be a GREAT idea. The study doesn’t go into details (because it’s trying to make the data prove what they want instead of analysing it) but let’s look at one single vaccine, and compare this single vaccine with the whole of the accumulated hypothetical dangers of vaccines. Let’s talk about the BCG.

BCG is the vaccine that prevents tuberculosis, also known as white death or consumption. Before vaccines TB accounted for 25% of all deaths in Europe, this means that for every 4 people who died, one of them was by TB. Do you think COVID was bad? COVID was only 6% of deaths at it’s peak. But hey, maybe you don’t believe in COVID, let’s compare it to actual numbers, in 2018 (before the pandemic) approximately 8.1 million people died in Europe, of those only 259,000 were TB, if we subtract those we get 7.76 million, scaling that back to pre-vaccine days that takes us to 2.6 million deaths per year related to TB (there’s probably some overlap of people’s who died of other stuff and would have died of TB in that hypothetical scenario, but still) even being very generous that’s an extra 1 million deaths. 1 million preventable deaths per year in exchange for a few extra cases of asthma and ADHD seems like a goods exchange. Also have you stopped to consider that maybe since people don’t die of TB they live long enough to have asthma diagnosed?

You can switch to crickets, I think that’s your best murder per Kg ratio.

Yeah, few bad apples is one of the sayings that people use completely backwards, the other ones is “the blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb” which people abbreviate to “blood is thicker than water” to mean the exact opposite.

Because only 'Muricas:

• Assume you know what country they’re in
• Have blatant healthcare issues
• Use random units that convert weirdly between themselves
• Get offended when you point any of this up

Their star would eventually die. Flames would die, objects break, it’s not a far fetched thing to think that similar stuff can happen to living beings.

Outer wilds, went in blind (as you should) was not disappointed.

I liked it the first time I played it, but then I decided to play it again to choose different things and realized the horrible truth that it’s all magicians choice. Who do you save A or B? You choose A then A survives and B dies and A is angry that you let B died, you choose B then you fail to save them but A saves themselves so A survives and B dies and A is angry that you tried to save B instead of them. It doesn’t matter much what you choose, the game will do the same.