@James

Hey everyone, I'm looking for a few people who enjoy robotics and might be interested in collaborating on an open-source robot project. I'm mainly looking for help with things like: PCB design 3D printable chassis Firmware/code Electronics planning I'll be sourcing the parts and assembling it myself. The goal is to create a low-cost robot that anyone can build and improve. This isn't a paid project, just something for fun and to learn together. If you've been wanting to work on a community robotics project or have ideas you'd like to contribute, I'd love to hear from you. Feel free to comment or send me a DM if you're interested. submitted by /u/Worried-You-7003 [link] [Kommentare]

Google deployed an agentic AI peer-reviewer at two top CS conferences — reviewing ~10,000 papers with 30-minute turnaround — and the new formal research paper shows it catches 34% more mathematical errors than zero-shot prompting; the precedent for AI-automated scientific review at conference scale is set and now formally documented. -- Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.28277 submitted by /u/Justgototheeffinmoon [link] [Kommentare]

Credit: Oscar alexander CC-BY-SA-3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en Consider this past question from an "ethical hacking" certification posted on itexamanswers.net 1 : Which threat actor term describes a well-funded and motivated group that will use the latest attack techniques for financial gain? hacktivist state-sponsored attacker organized crime insider threat The question describes the threat actor as follows: The threat actor is a group of, presumably, people They're well-funded They're motivated They use the latest attack techniques They desire financial gain A hacktivist, a horrible portmanteau of hack and activism, in the examiners head is likely underfunded and doesn't desire financial gain. 2 Never mind that the term activism intends to delegitimize people's political when someone selectively calls a person activist when they don't agree with that person's opinion. Let's rule out hacktivist then. A state-sponsored attacker can seek financial gain. This can happen directly or indirectly. State-sponsored groups performing espionage can create financial gain for a country when they steal trade secrets. The sponsoring state likely compensates them well for their work: a direct financial gain. Let's call this a yes then. What about organized crime? If they manage their finances right, they may be well-funded. They need more finances, so they desire financial gain. It's questionable whether they use the latest attack techniques. If the examiner thinks that the OWASP Top 10 classify as latest attack techniques, then organized crime are a yes for this question. Lastly, consider an insider threat. They may be well-funded and are perhaps receiving money from an outside group. Who's to say that they're not using the latest attack techniques? They may desire financial gain for all we know. Let's call this a yes for this question, too. Too bad that this question isn't a multiple-choice question. Here's the "correct" answer: organized crime The author on itexamanswers.net explains: Several years ago, the cybercrime industry took over the number-one spot for the most profitable illegal industry, attracting a new type of cyber-criminal. Organized crime goes where the money is. It consists of very well-funded and motivated groups that will typically use any of the latest attack techniques to gain access to information systems. Perhaps the author wants to evoke the image of wealthy ransomware gangs in your mind6. At the same time, state-sponsored attacks provide a steady income to North Korea. The U.S. Department of the Treasury alleges that North Korea-affiliated attackers stole over 3 billion USD in mostly cryptocurrency between 2022 and 2025.3 I find little value in cybersecurity education if it merely teaches you outdated trivia that never leaves room for nuance. I doubt that the companies trying to fill their 750,000 cybersecurity roles 4 need workers armed with boring information morsels. Then again, I doubt that these 750,000 roles exist in the first place or that these companies offer salaries high enough to motivate workers to fill these roles. You're likely to attain more worthwhile knowledge by purchasing a second-hand wireless router, dumping the firmware, and finding a null-pointer dereference bug.5 Which threat actor term describes a well-funded and motivated group that will use the latest attack techniques for financial gain? on itexamanswers.net from Oct 11, 2023 ↩ You'd think someone being underfunded means that they're interested in having more finances to do their activism ↩ Treasury Sanctions DPRK Bankers and Institutions Involved in Laundering Cybercrime Proceeds and IT Worker Funds home.treasury.gov. Nov 4, 2025 ↩ Cybersecurity Workforce Shortage: A Comprehensive 2025 Study acsmi.org ↩ Which I've done: Security Advisory on Null pointer Dereference Vulnerability on TP-Link TL-WR841N (CVE-2025-9014) from Jan 15, 2026 ↩ Or perhaps I've listened to too much Darknet Diaries last year. ↩

For as long as there have been tests in schools, students have found ways to cheat, whether its peeking over a classmate’s shoulder or scribbling notes on a palm or crib sheet.

Having played both parts in the kabuki play that is employee-employer matchmaking, I feel the way we play it is a zero-sum game. I wish it were not so. When this post started life in 2024, as a wall of text chat message, it was brutal out there, on both sides of the software industry interview table. The ZIRP had ended. As of 2026, post-ZIRP reality has properly set in and remains bad ("AI" is a Fig Leaf (Enterprise Edition) for structural damage they self-inflicted, and if you look at Hyperscaler GPU depreciation schedules, they are making it order-of-magnitude worse). Set to that backdrop, here is a hopefully hopeful hiring anecdote where I think we avoided the so-called "Secretary Problem", framed within Optimal Stopping Theory. It can be done. Non-zero-sum hiring ought to be default-mode for any industry, AI or no AI.