Sync

1.2K posts

Sync banner
Sync

Sync

@syntaxraw

20 • Engineer • C++ • all views are my own

Katılım Mart 2022
551 Takip Edilen252 Takipçiler
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
gpt image 2
Sync tweet media
Français
0
0
2
39
Shiblee Showkat
Shiblee Showkat@stackychan_·
I am creating a small group for us CS students/devs where we can discuss about career, goals, upcoming hackathons and eventually prepare together for GSoC '27 The response to this thread has been insane, and it's clear so many of us are on the exact same grind right now. Let me know who's in ⬇️
Shiblee Showkat@stackychan_

GSoC 2026 results just dropped. 1141 people were selected out of 15k+ applicants As for me, I completely wasted the first 2 years of my degree not taking things seriously 🥹. This year, I didn't even apply because I'm still in my learning phase But that’s exactly why I'm building in public now. My dream is to get selected for GSoC '27 (my final year). Next year, we're in 🫡

English
174
9
165
12.8K
Vaishnavi
Vaishnavi@vaishnavidotdev·
April wasn’t the most intense coding month, but I still showed up. Balancing midsems, submissions, labs, vivas, and DSA together was tougher than expected — but consistency mattered more than perfect numbers this month.
Vaishnavi tweet media
English
3
0
7
117
Hero Of Justice
Hero Of Justice@herooffjustice·
today I'm gonna do programming, calculus, deep learning, and maybe some philosophy :) I hope y'all have a beautiful day 🤍✨✨
Hero Of Justice tweet media
English
4
0
25
336
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
@HelloVyom I read this only at the end of the whole thing u wrote
Sync tweet media
English
0
0
3
323
VG🌪️
VG🌪️@HelloVyom·
I had a Jane Street interview that felt less like an interview and more like I accidentally wandered into someone else’s thought experiment. It was round four. Not even final. The interviewer walks in, looks at me, then rotates the chair 90 degrees away from the whiteboard and sits facing the wall. No introduction. He says, “We’re going to play a game.” I say, “Okay.” He says, “You are a pigeon.” Long pause. I wait for the rest. There is no rest. So I say, “Alright.” He says, “You are a pigeon in Manhattan. You have perfect information about all crumbs in a three-block radius, but you can only remember the last five crumbs you ate.” I say, “Got it.” He says, “What is your strategy?” I start talking about greedy algorithms. Always go to the nearest crumb, minimize travel time, maximize caloric intake per second. He interrupts. “You’re optimizing locally.” I say, “Well, yes.” He says, “Pigeons don’t get paid to optimize locally.” I pivot. I say maybe we model crumb arrival as a stochastic process. Then we balance exploration and exploitation. Occasionally ignore known crumbs to discover new clusters. He spins his chair halfway toward me. Progress. “Define occasionally.” I say, “Maybe epsilon-greedy. Ten percent exploration.” He nods, then immediately says, “Too high. You’ll starve.” I say, “Five percent?” He says, “Too low. You’ll stagnate.” I say, “So somewhere in between.” He says, “That’s not a number.” I panic and say, “Seven percent.” He writes 0.07 on the board and circles it like it means something. Then he says, “Now introduce competition.” He adds: other pigeons: infinite crumbs: finite memory: still five He says, “What changes?” I say we need to account for adversarial behavior. Maybe other pigeons front-run known crumb locations. He says, “They do.” I say then we should randomize paths to avoid being predictable. He says, “They randomize too.” I say, “Then… we need better information.” He says, “You already have perfect information.” That one lands. So I say the edge must come from execution, not information. Faster arrival, better pathing, maybe committing to a niche region and dominating it. He fully turns around now. “Define dominate.” I say, “You consistently arrive first to crumbs in your region.” He says, “At what cost?” I say, “Opportunity cost of missing crumbs elsewhere.” He nods. Then he says, “Now assume crumbs decay in value over time.” I say, “Like… they get eaten?” He says, “Or stepped on.” I say, “Okay.” He says, “What’s your pricing model?” I laugh a little because pigeon pricing model sounds absurd. He does not laugh. So I say each crumb has a time-dependent value function. The longer it sits, the less it’s worth. So we discount based on expected delay. He says, “Write it.” I write something hand-wavy like value equals base times e to the minus lambda t. He stares at it for a while. Then he says, “What’s lambda?” I say, “Decay rate.” He says, “No. What’s lambda.” I realize he wants a number again. I say, “Depends on foot traffic.” He says, “Assume Midtown at lunch.” I say, “High.” He says, “That’s not a number.” I say, “Okay… 2?” He writes 2 next to it and underlines it twice. Then he says, “Now you have a choice.” He writes two options: guaranteed crumb now worth 5 expected crumb in 10 seconds worth 12 with probability 0.6 He says, “Which do you take?” I say expected value of the second is 7.2, so take the second. He says, “You hesitated.” I say, “A little.” He says, “Why?” I say because of risk. He says, “You’re a pigeon.” I say, “Right.” He says, “Do pigeons hedge?” I say, “No.” He says, “Exactly.” Then he erases the board completely. He turns back and says, “Final question.” I brace. He says, “How many pigeons are there in Manhattan?” I start doing the usual estimation. Area, density, food availability. Halfway through he stops me. “You don’t care about pigeons.” I say, “I thought I was a pigeon.” He says, “You are.” Pause. Then he says, “But you trade pigeons.” That’s when I knew I was completely off. I try to recover. I say then we should estimate supply and demand for pigeons, maybe based on tourism, food waste, urban density. He nods slightly. Then he asks, “Are you long or short?” I say, “Long pigeons?” He says, “Why?” I say, “Because there are a lot of crumbs.” He says, “Crumbs are decreasing.” I say, “Then short pigeons.” He says, “Too late.” Silence. He writes something down, stands up, and says, “Thanks for coming in.” I never heard back. all of this is cooked up
poof@poof_eth

Had a Jane Street interview in 2013 that still bothers me. It was my 6th round. Final interview. The guy walks in carrying no laptop, no notebook, just a cold brew and what I later realized was a single IKEA tea candle. He writes on the whiteboard: food: $200 rent: $800 utilities: $150 candles: $3,600 family: dying Then he turns around and says, “Optimize.” I laughed because I thought it was a culture-fit bit. He did not laugh. So I said, “Well, obviously you spend less on candles.” He says, “Assume candles are non-discretionary.” Okay. I start building a model. Basic constraint satisfaction. Family survival as a soft penalty. Candles as a state variable. Maybe there’s an arbitrage where you buy wholesale paraffin and convert the $3,600 line item into inventory. He stops me. “You’re thinking like a consultant.” That’s when I knew I was in trouble. He says, “Give me a bid-ask on family dying.” I say, “What?” He says, “You’re long candles, short family. Where do you make markets?” I try to recover. I say the real issue is liquidity: rent and utilities are fixed, food is elastic, candles are emotionally inelastic. Therefore the optimal strategy is to securitize future candle enjoyment and borrow against it. He nods for the first time. Then he asks, “What time do you sell the candles?” I say, “Whenever the market is liquid?” He says, “Be more specific.” I say, “Uh… 10 a.m. Eastern?” For the first time, he smiles. He goes, “Every day?” I say, “Every day.” He says, “In size?” I say, “In size.” He says, “And what do we call that?” I say, “Market manipulation?” The room gets very quiet. He looks disappointed and writes something down. “No. We call it providing liquidity to candle ETFs during the U.S. cash open.” I try to save it. “Right. Of course. The family isn’t dying because we underfunded them. They’re just experiencing temporary price discovery.” He nods again. Then he points back at the board. I had missed it. The utility bill was $150, but candles provide light. You can zero out utilities. I update the budget: food: $200 rent: $800 utilities: $0 candles: $3,750 family: still dying, but now in a more capital-efficient way He says, “How confident are you?” I say, “0.95.” He smiles and circles candles. “0.95 huh?” Then he asks me to estimate how many leveraged longs get liquidated if we dump $3,750 of candles at 10:00:01 every morning for 90 consecutive trading days. Needless to say I did not get the offer.

English
5
2
45
4.2K
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
@AnshikaK7 Ye aap itni sundar jagah mei rehti ho?
Eesti
0
0
1
17
Ashh
Ashh@AnshikaK7·
Serene 🌕
Ashh tweet mediaAshh tweet media
Italiano
5
0
24
264
Heisenberg04
Heisenberg04@ItsHeisenberg04·
@syntaxraw Mai bhi band krdunga Bhadwe jab dekho mail bhejte rehte
हिन्दी
1
0
1
32
Heisenberg04
Heisenberg04@ItsHeisenberg04·
Kya chutiya app hai ye
Heisenberg04 tweet media
हिन्दी
3
0
8
225
Vaibhav Pandey
Vaibhav Pandey@thatssovaibhav·
swirling some red
English
8
0
10
313
Hero Of Justice
Hero Of Justice@herooffjustice·
@syntaxraw you do 🫵✨ I know you can, you're bigger than these problems Have some belief 👊
English
1
0
1
20
Hero Of Justice
Hero Of Justice@herooffjustice·
today I'm gonna revise combinations & probability, deep learning, continue simulation, and philosophy So much to learn ✨ Have a beautiful day y'all 🤍✨✨
Hero Of Justice tweet media
English
6
1
30
450
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
Calculas
Español
0
0
0
45
VG🌪️
VG🌪️@HelloVyom·
Enroll in this bootcamp and you'll def be working at Jain Street, Opliver & TRT one day 🤞
VG🌪️ tweet media
English
8
2
20
1.4K
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
@Palakonweb wo aapka keyboard mujhe dedo 😋
Filipino
0
0
1
15
Palak
Palak@Palakonweb·
Daily log Day-4 >Travelled in a freaking 45°C > Attend lectures >Work work >project in progress
Palak tweet mediaPalak tweet mediaPalak tweet mediaPalak tweet media
English
8
0
65
1K
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
@Shrii_6 You did this already by showing it here 🤡
English
1
0
0
436
Shrii
Shrii@Shrii_6·
How Abt doing this trend on x? 😭
Shrii tweet media
English
141
9
651
77.5K
Sync
Sync@syntaxraw·
Someone is cooking something hard
Sync tweet media
English
0
0
2
46