It is difficult to suggest solutions without knowing exactly what the course is, but designing a class project to develop a solution for an analogous problem might be a solution.
Assign the students a project to filter out students with ulterior motives from a theoretical class. The engineers will then be forced to produce a solution for the problem of their own creation while subtly alerting other students that not everyone enrolled in the course is there for the same reason.
This is a fantastic suggestion. Probably not going to be applied by this professor but I love the symmetry of 'playing games' back and forth. Sounds fun honestly, as either side.
I'm running Windows 11 preview and have the ability to turn off taskbar items in taskbar settings. I get the impression that they are still experimenting with the search box settings.
There are also some indications that Washington is increasingly viewing semiconductors as a national security issue. There could be a shift in federal funding that could make the industry more attractive to talent again.
The industry doesn't have a talent shortage, which explains the working conditions. There will always be grad students who think "Cool! I get to do research involving quantum mechanics!"
Trust me, I've tried to talk them out of it and never succeeded.
One approach I used when I first started interviewing was to apply to a few jobs I wasn't really interested in pursuing to use as an opportunity to practice interviewing.
I use external recruiters for practice. They don't mind. They're either on their way up and are practicing too or good at their job and able to give you serious feedback.
Please don't do this. I get it's "good practice", but you are essentially wasting interviewing time -> company money for your little practice. Terrible advice.
I think they should just make a one time half-hour adjustment and split the difference. Not sure how much of a technical challenge that would present to implement.
Well, as far as technical challenges go, we would all have to change our clocks (or the clocks would have to receive some kind of signal to adjust their time accordingly).
My theory is that U.S. and other governments recognize that digital currency will eventually be necessary.
Rather than expend the resources to develop it themselves, they are giving the crypto community enough space to do the R&D for them. Once the technology evolves to a point that it is both secure and practical, the governments will implement their own digital iterations of their respective currencies.
Digital currency is already necessary, and is also already here.
Taking myself as an example, of all the actual money I currently own (so, not counting securities and whatnot, just cash and bank account balances), approximately 99.5% of it is currently digital and 0.5% of it is analog. And 100% of that is US dollars. And I'm unusually heavily invested in portraits of Andrew Jackson right now; it's typically more like 99.9% digital.
At present, I'm quite happy with USD for my digital currency needs because it offers me greater convenience and lower transaction fees than the available alternatives. One particularly compelling feature is that it's easily convertible to physical currency (and always at a nice, predictable 1:1 exchange rate), which remains the only game in town when I want to make a truly anonymous transaction. For example, when I give money to a pahnandler, I really don't want there to be any paper trail that the person I'm giving money to can possibly trace back to me.
Digital currency already exists, but with the much less sexy name of "bank accounts", "checks", "debit cards", and "wire transfers". The only thing that cryptocurrencies bring to the table is trustlessness, but that is what introduces the inefficiencies of cryptocurrencies, and prevents useful features such as reversible transactions in the case of fraud.
I think GP is merely referring to the idea not that Crypto Currencies AGMI, but that the Fed/Gov are allowing it all the happen so the research/investment is made to get the technology to the point that a PoST/PoS/(Solana|Cardano|Etherum|etc.) system exists as a reference point to create "FedCoin" featuring centralized control by the fed, but decentralized and trustless processing beyond that.
A system that is powered by crypto making payments and etc basically free, but with the ability to reverse fraud transactions or similar. They have their own goals/constraints that are different than crypto currencies today. Another comment refers to a universal API; even if the API is JUST for settlement between banks it would probably make things way simpler, cheaper, and more efficient.
edit: typo, added universal api comment agreeing with comments from kasey_junk
This was my position until very recently as well but I’ve recently been convinced otherwise.
The trust stuff is actually the least interesting part (though perhaps a prerequisite for it).
The interesting part is the potential for a “universal” api. Instead of having to integrate with every financial institution to support the myriad payment methods out there you can support the crypto currency. That’s a big deal.
It’s not what the crypto libertarians are pitching and I still believe that governmental currency controls will always be a thing but standardizing the actual mechanics of money movement would be huge.
>>The interesting part is the potential for a “universal” api.
This is true both at the application level and the software standards level. An example of the first would be Uniswap. Any one in the world can access this exchange, both for listing tokens, and for trading them, and it is guaranteed to never shut down, as long as the Ethereum network and blockchain exists. This is absolute universality in terms of APIs.
In terms of software standards, the EVM is already used by multiple blockchains, which makes them all share the same address format out of the box, and compatible with software like MetaMask that has tens of millions of installations. I could send Ethereum tokens to your Polygon (an EVM based chain) address, and you would be able to use your Polygon Chain private key to access them. All that you would be required to do is go to MetaMask and switch your network from Polygon to Ethereum mainnet, and the tokens would be appear in your wallet interface.
>>It’s not what the crypto libertarians are pitching and I still believe that governmental currency controls
Government currency controls cannot be a thing any more. Monetary transactions dependent solely on cryptographic authentication, and published to a completely decentralized and immutable platform, totally unmoors money from the types of bottlenecks that state actors could use to control its flows. To control currency requires controlling the flow of information now, and with the universal adoption of the internet, that is not happening.
At least in the US, I'm of the opinion that the government leaning into "stablecoins", and letting private industry launch several different versions of these is the best path forward (and most likely path).
Assign the students a project to filter out students with ulterior motives from a theoretical class. The engineers will then be forced to produce a solution for the problem of their own creation while subtly alerting other students that not everyone enrolled in the course is there for the same reason.