I just finished a round of job interviews. LeetCode screens, take-home tasks, vibe coding sessions. The whole spectrum. Here’s what I actually think about each one.

The theory behind LeetCode is defensible: a standardised problem, a time limit, a controlled environment. Everyone gets the same test. Objective. Comparable.

The practice is something else.

When I sit down to do a LeetCode screen, I don’t feel like I’m being evaluated. I feel like I’m proving I did the homework. It’s a secret handshake: a prerequisite you clear before the real conversation can start, regardless of whether inverting a binary tree has anything to do with the role.

What LeetCode actually measures is preparation. Recent, specific preparation. A senior engineer who’s shipped production systems for a decade can still fail if they haven’t practised the pattern library in the last 90 days. The format rewards the person who did the extra prep, who sat down and worked through this specific class of exercises until the shapes became familiar. If you’re preparing for it, resources like NeetCode 150 are useful because they teach the patterns, not just the answers. That’s the game: recognise the shape quickly enough, then execute under pressure.

If I’m being honest, these interviews give me the same feeling I used to get before school exams. Not fear exactly, but the sense that I’m about to be tested on how well I revised. But I also understand why companies use them. If you have thousands of applicants, LeetCode gives you a fast, standardised filter.

It’s also worth separating at-home LeetCode-style challenges from live ones. At-home challenges are harder to trust now. If the problem is self-contained and the candidate is alone, AI can solve a lot of it. That doesn’t mean everyone is cheating. It does mean the format has to account for it.

Live LeetCode has a different problem. Run badly, it becomes a memory test: have you seen this exact pattern before, and can you reproduce it while someone watches? Run better, it can at least test pattern recognition, communication, and thinking under pressure. That distinction matters.

The companies that rely on it most also have the most applicants. When you can afford high false negatives, you don’t have to fix the screen.

Take-homes start from a different premise: a realistic problem, your own environment, your own tools, no artificial time pressure. See what someone actually builds.

When I helped run interviews, we gave candidates a focused ML task that fit in a couple of hours. The submission wasn’t the verdict; it was the starting point. The follow-up session was where the real signal was. We’d ask about implementation decisions, probe the parts we found interesting, and ask them to make live changes. You find out quickly whether someone understands their own code or just assembled it.

In my opinion, that’s a well-designed take-home, though I might be biased since I helped design it at my previous company. The format depends heavily on how the task is run.

The problems are usually the same. Scope creep: “should take 3–4 hours” becomes a weekend. Asymmetry: the candidate invests serious time with no guarantee of feedback. Gaming: without time pressure, candidates can over-polish the submission until it stops reflecting how they actually work.

There’s also a structural issue worth naming: the ask is unevenly distributed. A take-home is easier to absorb if you’re between jobs, have quiet evenings, or can spend a weekend polishing. It’s much harder if you’re currently employed, caring for someone, or already squeezed for time.

So the same format can reveal very different things depending on how it’s run. Sometimes the signal is engineering judgment. Sometimes it’s mixed with everything around the candidate’s life.

The newest format: you write code while thinking aloud, often with AI tools available, with an interviewer who participates rather than just observes. The focus shifts from “did you solve it?” to “how do you think while solving it?”

LeetCode and take-homes are established formats. Vibe coding is not. The edges are still fuzzy: different companies are using the same label for very different interviews.

The two vibe coding interviews I did in this round were very different, which is part of why the format is hard to talk about cleanly.

One was a concrete spec-to-implementation task. I could use my own AI setup, so I used opencode and prompted it to clarify the plan before building. After the code was generated, the interview shifted into review: understand what was built, explain decisions, and compare tradeoffs.

The other was much more abstract: take a loose product prompt and turn it into something working. Again, the useful part was not just asking the model to generate code, but forcing clarification first. By the end, I had a rough prototype in a stack I would not normally choose, followed by a short discussion about what I would do next.

The interesting shift is not that code stops mattering. It is that code alone tells the interviewer less. If the model can generate a plausible implementation, the signal moves to everything around it: how you frame the problem, how you constrain the tool, how you test the output, and whether you understand the tradeoffs.

Traditional live coding puts a lot of weight on retrieval: can you remember the syntax, the pattern, the data structure, the trick? AI changes the value of that memory test. The scarce skill is no longer retrieving the first plausible answer. It is validating whether that answer is right.

Prompting is not just a shortcut here. The prompt becomes part of the signal. A vague prompt usually means vague thinking. A good prompt shows that you can decompose the problem, state constraints, and force clarification before generating code.

AI can make shallow understanding more visible, not less. If you accept the first answer and cannot explain it, the follow-up questions expose that quickly. The tool can generate code, but it cannot give you ownership of the code.

There is one advantage across both versions: shallow understanding is harder to hide. You can’t prepare a polished artifact in advance. You can’t memorise the pattern for this problem type. You have to think in real time, with someone watching how you think.

But it is not neutral. Vibe coding rewards people who have already built the muscle. The developer with the maxed-out subscriptions, a tuned local setup, a library of prompts, and reusable skills for every common task is going to move faster than someone opening the tool for the first time.

I’m not sure that advantage is automatically unfair. Knowing how to use the tools well is becoming part of the job. If someone has learned how to decompose a problem, constrain the model, review its output, and recover when it goes wrong, that is real engineering judgment.

There is a real preparation gap here. Someone who has spent months building prompts, skills, and workflows will look much stronger than someone using the tool cold. That is not obviously different from LeetCode rewarding someone who spent months grinding patterns. The uncomfortable difference is cost: LeetCode practice is mostly free; serious AI-tool fluency often is not. Someone unemployed or earlier in their career may not have the same setup, even if they have the same underlying ability. So the advantage might be signal. It might also be privilege. Most interviews don’t separate those cleanly.

Companies haven’t converged on a standard and the variance is wide enough to be its own signal. I looked around at public candidate reports, interview prep posts, and discussions from people who had recently gone through these loops. I wouldn’t treat any of this as official policy, but the patterns are useful.

Shopify is one of the most AI-forward examples I found. According to Hello Interview’s write-up, candidates can expect AI-enabled coding rounds where using AI is part of the exercise, not a violation of it. Catching the model’s mistakes is part of what they’re evaluating.

Meta has also moved in this direction. Hello Interview describes repo-scale tasks with AI available, and 404 Media reported that Meta would let candidates use AI during coding tests. That’s a meaningful statement about what they think the job is now.

One Google-focused community interview guide had the most explicit rubric I found. It frames the work around decomposing problems into modular prompts, encoding constraints before generating anything, validating output rather than accepting it, and diagnosing when a failure is in the prompt vs the code. That’s actually a coherent theory of AI-era engineering judgment.

Stripe has reportedly added an AI programming exercise in HackerRank, with a built-in AI chat window. The reported task is spec-heavy, multi-part, and hard to finish by hand in the time available. The controlled environment matters: candidates get access to the same model and the same tool surface, instead of bringing whatever paid setup they already use. From candidate accounts, the signal is less “can you code this from scratch?” and more “can you read the spec quickly, guide the AI, review its output, add tests, catch edge cases, and explain your reasoning under pressure?”

Amazon has reports pointing in the same direction. In one Reddit thread, a candidate said their recruiter offered an AI-assisted coding round and reimbursement for the tool, reportedly up to $100. Another commenter said they had done the round using Cursor and were reimbursed. That doesn’t mean the whole loop has changed, but it does show how quickly the norms are moving.

The pattern: companies are not moving in one clean direction. Some are building AI into the interview environment. Some are allowing candidates to bring tools. Some are still closer to traditional coding screens. Big tech is fragmenting by role, team, and probably recruiter guidance.

The issue is not that every company needs the same evaluation. They don’t. A company hiring for product prototyping should look for different signals than one hiring for infrastructure work. The problem is when the interview has no explicit criteria at all.

Without criteria, “good vibes” starts doing the assessment. That’s just bias with a friendlier name.

Tooling also complicates the signal. A controlled environment makes access more equal, but it may hide how someone actually works. Letting candidates bring their own setup is more realistic, but it also rewards people who have had the time and money to build one.

A good vibe coding interview makes the competencies explicit upfront. Not “write some code with AI and we’ll see how it goes,” but “we’re watching how you decompose, how you constrain, and how you validate.” The difference between that and the average version is the difference between a signal and a vibe.

A realistic, feature-sized problem. Not algorithmic puzzles, but rather something closer to actual day-to-day work. Done collaboratively, with the interviewer as a participant. Time-boxed, but not in a way that creates artificial panic. Followed by a conversation about the decisions, not just the code.

That’s a well-run vibe coding interview with a clear rubric. It captures what the other formats are reaching for, without most of the distortions.

The harder truth: this doesn’t scale easily, which is why most companies won’t do it. And scale tends to win over signal in hiring.

What’s been your experience across these formats?

Three Coding Interview Formats: And What Each One Actually Tests was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

On June 16, 2026, our community gathered once again for a tradition that has grown into something much greater than an Annual General Meeting. 

House of Friendship’s Strawberry Social is a moment to pause, reflect, connect, and celebrate what we are building together. 

This year’s theme, “Building a Village – A Community That Lasts,” reminded us that none of us can do this work alone. A village is built through care, through compassion, and through people who choose to show up for one another. 

This year, that village was felt in every corner of the room.

There was an unmistakable sense of connection in the room. Supporters, partners, staff, volunteers, and community members came together, united by a shared belief in creating a stronger, more compassionate Waterloo Region. 

Throughout the afternoon, we saw what building a village truly looks like in action. 

We heard from Janine Vidal, whose journey with House of Friendship has come full circle. What began as support for her family became a pathway into leadership. Today, she walks alongside others as they rebuild their own lives. 

Her story is a powerful reminder that change often begins with one connection — one person who listens, who supports, who helps you take the next step forward. 

We also celebrated the incredible young leaders from our Boys in Leadership program and Youth Smile-Link.

These youth are not waiting for the future to arrive, they are shaping it right now. 

One of the most meaningful moments of the day was sharing progress on Friendship Village — a new supportive and affordable housing community opening later this year in downtown Kitchener. 

When complete, Friendship Village will include: 

• 100 units of supportive housing in Phase One 

• 70 additional affordable units in Phase Two 

But more than that, it represents a new way forward. A place where housing is just the beginning. Where care, connection, and community are built into everyday life. 

Friendship Village is designed so that individuals can move forward at their own pace, with the supports they need, while staying connected to the relationships that help them thrive. 

Belonging is not something people should have to leave behind as they heal.

During the event, we launched a new initiative: 
Welcome Home: Friendship Village 

This campaign invites our community to help furnish each unit within Friendship Village, ensuring that every resident arrives not just to housing, but to a space that feels like home. 

A bed. A table. A place to sit. 
These simple things carry deep meaning. 

They say:  

You are welcome here. 
You are cared for. 
You belong. 

This is an opportunity for our community to come together in a tangible and meaningful way, to prepare a space for someone they may never meet, but whose life they will directly impact. 

We are deeply grateful to everyone who joined us — to our sponsors, donors, community partners, volunteers, and staff. 

Your support makes this work possible. We are so grateful to be building this community with you. 

Because of you, more people in Waterloo Region will find a place where they can belong, a place where they can rebuild, a place they can finally call home.

Explore More 

• Watch the full presentation: Link 

• View event photos: Link

• Learn about Friendship Village: Friendship Village – House Of Friendship 

• Support Welcome Home: Gift Catalogue – House Of Friendship 

The post Strawberry Social 2026: Building a Village That Lasts appeared first on House Of Friendship.

Well there are a few reasons. Firstly I know how difficult it is to remove contamination from both soils and groundwater once it is there. I have been following very closely the unsuccessful efforts here in Elmira for the last 36 years. If talk and bull were cleanup they'd have been done many years ago. The so called cleanup efforts to the best of my knowledge in and around the Safety-Kleen site in Breslau have not been even 5% of the efforts, cleanup and pumping done both on the Uniroyal site as well as those done directly below ground in Elmira. 

I have seen and read past groundwater monitoring reports done on the east side of the Grand River, between Safety-Kleen's operations and the Grand River. A large part of this area was and maybe still is owned by Forwell Gravell. These monitoring wells are not solely shallow groundwater but also deeper groundwater in which the nearby pumping wells are screened. Lots of various solvents are present presumably from earlier efforts to bring in dirty oil for recycling that unfortunately contained these solvents whether unintentionally or intentionally in order to get rid of them.

With my own eyes I have seen colour photographs of various excavations done on and near the Safety-Kleen site. I have seen sub-surface soil excavations of contaminated sites before whether the two Varnicolor sites in Elmira or the Uniroyal site also in Elmira. They are not a pretty picture and just like at Uniroyal, I expect that without massive on-site source removal, the site and surrounding groundwater will never be clean much less achieve even our modest drinking water standards.

Two wells for sure are on the east side of the Grand River and the rest recently mentioned in the K-W Record are on the west side of the river. However their well screens are well beneath the river bottom and pumping will easily draw water from the contaminated side, under the river and into the wells.   

All of this combined with the likely Mickey Mouse upcoming Environmental Assessment will make for very bad quality drinking water. Bon appetit !

Please contact Eyedro Sales for more information: 

Options champions and celebrates the sexual health of all people in BC by supporting, providing, and promoting inclusive and accessible health care and education.

Based in British Columbia, Options for Sexual Health (Options) is Canada’s largest non- profit provider of sexual health services in Canada. We operate through clinics, community engagement and education programs, and the Sex Sense information and referral service.

Options seeks to provide comprehensive and accurate information, support for sexual expression and reproductive choice, and confidential clinical services that help British Columbians enjoy healthy sexuality throughout life.

We acknowledge that Options for Sexual Health operates across the homelands of the more than 198 First Nations and 30 Métis charter communities throughout the province.

We are currently seeking up to 4 new members to serve on Options’ governance-focused Board of Directors. The Board’s role is to lead and guide Options in achieving its mission, vision and strategic priorities. The Board helps determine how Options makes a difference for British Columbians: what good, for which need, for whom, at what cost, and how ethically.

In particular, the role of the Board is to:

• Foster connections between Options, its members, and the community at large
• Oversee governing policies that guide the organization in:
  • Future and Strategic Planning
  • Organizational Outcomes
  • The Board-Executive Director Relationship
  • Governance processes
• Ensure adherence to applicable laws and regulations
• Make decisions about financial management, risk management and resource management
• Evaluate the performance of both the Executive Director and Board.

Volunteer six to ten hours a month. This will include attending in-person and virtual board and committee meetings, preparing for meetings, and attending special events. Most in-person commitments are in Vancouver, and any travel expenses will be reimbursed.

We want people who are committed and care! We have a lot of great people on the Board already and need to add a few more people with particular characteristics and skillsets.

The following are considered key qualifications for the Board Directors:

• A demonstrated commitment to the organization’s mission, vision, values and strategic directions
• Knowledge of the various types of communities and clients Options serves
• A commitment to serve the first full 2-year term
• Being simultaneously kind, and your own kind of rad

Experience in a mid- to large-sized organization or serving on a Board of Directors is also considered an asset.

Specific skills we are currently seeking include:

• Financial Management (CGA/CPA preferred)
• Strong connections with leaders in the business community
• Communications
• Entrepreneurship
• Fundraising

We invite applications from anyone who may contribute to furthering the mission of Options, and especially those who represent groups we serve.

We especially encourage applications from individuals who are:

• Living in rural and remote communities
• Youth (under 25)
• Older adults (over 65)
• 2SLGBTQIA+
• Indigenous
• Black and/or people of colour
• People with disabilities
• Members of other marginalized populations (e.g. temporary residents, low socio-economic status)

We invite you to self-identify and link to the work of Options within your application materials.

To express your interest in joining the Options board, please email executivedirector@optbc.org with your resume and a letter outlining why you are interested and are a good match. If you do not have a resume, a letter (or email) is fine.

The post Options appeared first on Capacity Canada.

Why is anybody surprised anymore by Donald Trump's behaviour? He has an extremely recently signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Iran which firstly I'm sure he has a copy of in English and secondly so does the rest of the world and it says that hostilities must end in Lebanon.  Now maybe Trump's first stupidity was agreeing to something he maybe can't deliver namely Israel stepping back from it's hostile activities in Lebanon. Regardless the twit signed it.

Then as Israel continues pounding Lebanon, Iran as promised sends some missiles over to Israel to remind them about the MOU which granted they have not signed. Then Trump who at least used to have access to the best and brightest brains in America not only threatens the country of Iran with further attacks but he goes so far as to suggest  that the Iranian leaders and emissaries present at the negotiations in Switzerland should behave or they might not make it back home to Iran. Holy crap what an assh#ole Trump is. He only recently invaded a sovereign country (Venezuela) and kidnapped their President and under his command the U.S. has actually bombed Iran in the past DURING peace negotiations. He has also threatened the sovereignty of Cuba, Greenland (Denmark) and Canada.

Assuming that at one time he was sane and rational, it appears that  those days are long gone. There are mechanisms for America to remove a President who has become incapacitated whether by age, physical health, mental health or even by criminal behavior. That time is now due before he singlehandedly starts World War Three.    

♦

In a few short months, people in our community will leave homelessness behind by moving into Friendship Village!

The first phase of this project, still under construction in downtown Kitchener, will provide housing and healthcare supports for 100 residents, providing a new pathway out of homelessness for people in our community. A second, later phase, will provide additional housing for 70 community members.

Residents will have their own apartments, along with one-on-one support from staff, and access to health care, mental health, and addiction support to help them rebuild and stabilize their lives.

The new building will also have recreational programming and common spaces, to build community and connection – crucial after the many losses they’ve experienced while homeless.

Friendship Village will build on the lessons learned in ShelterCare, providing a range of supports to help residents grow more independent. Residents will have the chance to relearn critical life skills like cooking, cleaning and doing laundry, and become part of a larger community again.

“By providing this tailored support to the residents in Friendship Village, we are helping them get stronger and healthier, so that they can reclaim their lives and one day, move on to greater independence and stability,” said Tracey-Shonk-Lacey, House of Friendship Program Director. “This is so much more than a new building – it’s a way forward in our community’s journey to find solutions to homelessness.”

Construction on Friendship Village will continue into the fall, with the first residents expected to move in later this year.

YOU can be part of Friendship Village! Your generous gift today will help provide housing, support and more for people who are struggling with homelessness.

♦

Donate TODAY!

The post Get Ready for Friendship Village appeared first on House Of Friendship.

The first time my pipeline failed, I assumed I had made some tiny mistake.

A wrong parameter. A missing library. Maybe I forgot to update a path somewhere.

I genuinely thought it would take ten minutes to fix.

It took almost two days. And honestly, I’m still not completely sure I fixed the right thing. The results looked better after. Whether that means I actually solved it, I couldn’t tell you.

Before my internship, most of my experience came from coursework and tutorials where the datasets were clean, and the instructions were clear. You download the data, train the model, get a result, write a report, and move on.

Real-world data doesn’t work like that.

Things break for reasons that aren’t immediately obvious. One preprocessing mistake quietly ruins everything downstream, and you won’t notice until three steps later when nothing adds up. At one point, I had so many temporary print statements scattered through my code that reading the output became its own separate problem.

And the error messages almost never point to the actual issue. I don’t know why I kept trusting them.

I remember one evening - it was late, probably past 5, I had a half-eaten sandwich next to me that I kept meaning to throw away - staring at outputs that made absolutely no sense.

Not slightly wrong. Completely wrong.

The kind of wrong that makes you wonder if you’re even looking at the correct file.

After hours of checking things, I was fairly confident weren’t the problem, I eventually traced the issue back to something in the preprocessing step. Something I had glossed over because it seemed too small to matter. I had spent most of the day looking in the entirely wrong place.

That’s when I started understanding that debugging isn’t really about finding errors.

It’s about finding assumptions.

AI research is full of assumptions.

You assume the data is fine. That the labels make sense. You assume the model is the problem, then you assume it isn’t, then you’re not really sure what you’re testing anymore. Most of the time, you’re just trying to figure out which assumption quietly betrayed you three hours ago.

I probably reran the same experiment more times than was strictly necessary because I kept hoping the next result would somehow make more sense than the last one. Sometimes it did. Usually, it didn’t.

A surprising amount of debugging is just staring at numbers until one of them looks slightly suspicious.

What surprised me most wasn’t how complicated the models were. It was how much time went into everything around them.

Reading documentation. Checking outputs. Verifying whether something actually improved or just got lucky on that particular run. Trying to figure out whether a result was meaningful or whether I had accidentally introduced a different problem while fixing the first one.

There’s one issue I ran into mid-internship that I still haven’t fully explained. I worked around it. It hasn’t come back. I’ve decided not to think about it too hard.

One bug disappeared completely after a restart, and I still don’t know why.

I used to think strong programmers were people who wrote complicated code quickly.

I don’t think that anymore.

Strong engineers are people who stay calm when nothing is working. Because sooner or later, something always stops working. You spend hours debugging and find a mistake that takes five seconds to fix. Or the fix doesn’t fix anything. Or you solve one problem and immediately discover two more you hadn’t noticed before.

I wish I could say I had a systematic debugging process. Most of the time it looked more like controlled panic with occasional breaks.

Sometimes the only thing that changed between failure and success was stepping away and looking at it again the next morning with slightly less frustration.

There were days I questioned everything.

The code. The dataset. My implementation. My understanding of what I was even trying to do.

During meetings, I’d sometimes listen to people discuss problems I hadn’t even considered yet. Eventually, I started to realize most people were figuring things out as they went, too. They just didn’t narrate the confusion out loud.

Nobody is debugging for hours because everything is going well.

At some point, without really realizing it, I stopped worrying so much about looking like I knew what I was doing.

I started asking more questions. Dumber questions. The kind I would’ve avoided before because I was worried about what they’d reveal about what I didn’t know.

It helped more than anything else I did.

Near the end of the internship, I didn’t feel like someone who had figured things out.

I had a clearer picture of how much I still didn’t understand. Which sounds discouraging, but actually felt useful. Knowing specifically what you don’t know is different from just feeling generally lost.

Some days, I left my laptop with nothing resolved. I’d come back the next morning, and something would click that hadn’t clicked the night before. That happened more than I expected.

I became less afraid of problems I couldn’t immediately solve.

AI research didn’t teach me how to have the answers.

Most days, it just taught me how to stay in the room when I didn’t.

I Thought AI Research Would Mostly Be About Coding. I Was Very Wrong. was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

♦

KITCHENER - Another day, another game where Jack Couch Park had a tough time containing the baseball.

In a game where 25 runs were scored, 19 were scored via the home run as the Barrie Baycats beat Kitchener 18-7 Sunday afternoon.

Barrie hit eight out of the park, giving them a league-leading 37 homers on the season.

Many of them were of the multi-run variety, as they ballooned their lead to 8-0 by the end of the third.

The Baycats continued to pile on the runs, only posting a zero-run inning once.

The Panthers were full marks with 14 hits, but couldn't keep up and couldn't solve Saul Vazquez with consistency.

Raffi Gross, Petey Kiefer and Josh Williams all hit solo shots, the only blemishes on what was a banner night for the visiting starting pitcher. 

Vazquez struck out nine through six innings for the win. He gave up seven hits and four runs.

The final of the four runs he was charged with was Trent Lawson coming around to score. He pinch ran for Josh Williams, who was clunked on the back to lead off the seventh.

For doing that, Vazquez was tossed from the game, and both benches even cleared for a moment.

Samuel Quintana took the loss for the Panthers. He gave up 10 runs on 10 hits, struck out five and walked two.

Malik Williams was three-for-five, while Yosvani Penalver had two hits.

Noah Hull was the big bat for Barrie, going three-for-six with two home runs and seven RBI.

Kitchener drops to 6-11 on the season, while Barrie improves to 13-4.

The Panthers don't have long to think about the loss, as Welland comes to town for a Monday night rain out make up game at 7:05 p.m.

GET YOUR TICKETS NOW and #PackTheJack!

Lore is a next-generation, open source version control system

Rust 5.9k Updated Jun 23

Most interns don’t fail dramatically. There’s no single blunder, no heated confrontation, no obvious red flag. They simply fade—competent on paper, forgettable in practice—and never quite understand why the return offer never comes.

That’s the quiet tragedy of it. The failure isn’t loud. It’s invisible.

After observing and working alongside dozens of interns across industries, I’ve noticed a consistent pattern: the ones who don’t make it rarely lack intelligence or technical skill. They lack professional self-awareness — the ability to see themselves as others in the organization actually see them.

Here’s what that looks like in practice.

The average intern measures success by completion. Did I finish the assignment? Did I submit it on time? Check. Check.

But the professionals watching you aren’t measuring completion — they’re measuring judgment. They want to know: Does this person understand why this task exists? Can they connect their work to a larger outcome?

Example
An intern is asked to compile a competitor analysis. She delivers a clean spreadsheet, right on schedule. Another intern delivers the same spreadsheet—but opens his email with, "I noticed two of these competitors recently shifted pricing models. Wanted to flag it in case it’s relevant to the Q3 discussion.” Same task. Completely different signal.

💡Takeaway: Before submitting any piece of work, ask yourself one question—so what? If you can’t answer it, your work isn’t done yet.

Internships are structured, but real professional environments are not. The moment your last task is complete and you’re silently waiting for the next one, you’ve already lost ground.

Senior professionals are busy. They don’t have time to manage your calendar for you. When you require constant direction, you become overhead—not an asset.

Example
An intern finishes a research brief two hours before the end of the day. She sends it over, then goes quiet. Meanwhile, a team meeting is being prepped for tomorrow with no one assigned to format the presentation slides. Nobody asked her to do it. She didn’t do it. The next intern — the one who noticed the gap and asked, “Is there anything I can help with for tomorrow’s meeting?” — was offered a full-time role six months later.

💡Takeaway: Get into the habit of a daily end-of-day question: “Is there anything the team needs help with before I wrap up?” It’s a small habit. The returns are disproportionate.

Most interns approach feedback defensively—consciously or not. They nod, say “noted,” and privately decide whether they agree. The best interns do something fundamentally different: they treat every piece of feedback as a data point about how the organization thinks.

Example
A manager tells an intern his email updates are too long. The average intern shortens the next email. The exceptional intern shortens it, then asks, "Is the right format a bullet summary at the top, or do you prefer no update unless something is urgent?” He’s not just fixing the problem. He’s learning the culture.

💡Takeaway: After receiving feedback, always follow up—not to debate it, but to confirm you’ve understood it correctly: “Just to make sure I’m applying this right—would [X] be closer to what you’re looking for?" This single habit makes you memorable.

Interns often believe they’re being evaluated during formal presentations, structured reviews, or visible deliverables. They’re not wrong — but they’re only half right.

The informal moments carry enormous weight. How you behave in a meeting you weren’t expected to contribute to. Whether you introduce yourself to someone new or wait to be introduced. Whether you follow up after a coffee chat or let it dissolve into nothing.

Example
Two interns attend the same all-hands meeting. One treats it as passive information. The other sends a one-line note to the speaker afterward: “Really found your point on customer retention interesting — it changed how I’m thinking about the project I’m working on.” That’s not flattery. That’s professional engagement. The second intern is remembered. The first is not.

💡Takeaway: Treat every interaction as part of your professional record. Not with anxiety — with intention.

Technical skills get you the internship. Cultural fluency determines whether you’re asked to stay.

Every organization has an unwritten operating system—how people communicate, how decisions get made, and what’s said in meetings versus what’s said in hallways. Interns who fail to read this OS often work hard in the wrong register: too formal where the team is casual, too casual where precision is expected, too quiet when visibility matters, and too loud when listening is the real job.

💡Takeaway: Spend your first two weeks observing more than performing. Watch how your manager communicates under pressure. Notice whose opinion carries weight in a room and why. Ask yourself: “What does ‘doing a great job’ actually look like here?” —and then calibrate.

They never explicitly ask, "What would make this internship a success from your perspective?”

That question, asked in the first week, changes everything. It tells your manager you’re serious. It gives you a target. And it reframes the internship from a passive experience into an active commitment.

Most interns wait to be told. The 1 in 100 asks.

The gap between a good intern and a great one is rarely talent. It’s the willingness to think like someone who already belongs there and then prove it, quietly, every single day.

If this article helped you, share it with a friend preparing for internships or entering corporate for the first time.

And follow the ENGINEERING BEYOND CODE series for more real corporate lessons that colleges rarely teach.

• Sujata Jha | Official - Medium
• 5 reasons Why Interns Should Not Overwork Themselves To Impress Everyone
• 4 Tips To Outshine In The First Week Of Internship
• What Shocked Me Most During My First Internship

The Intern Who Did Everything Right Still Didn’t Get the Offer was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

His dickhead lawyer actually called him a national treasure AFTER he was convicted. Perhaps convicted felon is better than the truth which is that he is also a convicted felon with allegations of being a serial rapist. These most recent charges and newer victims are coming up in 2027 and just the delay alone suggests to me that he is being given every opportunity to do the honourable thing and pass on before further tarnishing his formerly grandiose reputation. I have to wonder how long he's felt the need for private security. Maybe only since he was first charged but possibly ever since his first rape...oops I mean his first consensual sex with a female who later brought charges against him.   

Neither his lawyer nor himself were immediately yelling that they would appeal the decision. Strange. Any chance that it was a negotiated deal between Stronach and the prosecutors? Something along the lines of plead guilty (and no appeal) to the most minor charges and we'll give you a pass on the many rape charges. Maybe the idea was that Stronach literally would die before the next trial was started much less completed. Perhaps his sentencing on these two convictions will shed light on the matter. 

Hopefully he will quickly lose his Order of Canada status and medal . How many of our authorities knew that he had an indecent penchant  for younger women BEFORE he was recommended and then appointed to the Order of Canada? How many other Order of Canada recipients have behaved as Frank Stronach has? I wonder if even one right wing Conservative with a strong business reputation is now looking over his shoulder and wondering if his past criminalities may yet catch up to him. 

♦

LONDON - A lopsided fourth inning turned a close high-scoring game into a blowout.

The London Majors put seven on the board in the fourth and cruised to a 19-7 win over the Kitchener Panthers Friday night at Labatt Park.

Kitchener had a 7-5 lead headed into the home half of the fourth, buoyed by home runs from Yosuke Fujie, Mateo Zeppieri and Malik Williams, taking it to starter Victor Payano.

But Bawin Colon had a tough time finding the strike zone for Kitchener, giving up seven runs (six earned) on one hit, walked three and struck two batters. 

He faced seven batters and didn't record an out.

Owen MacNeil surrendered five runs on six hits in the first three innings, before making way to Colon for the fourth.

Payano got through five, giving up seven runs (five earned) on seven hits, walking one and striking out five. 

The Majors bullpen made the difference. While the Kitchener bullpen couldn't slow London down, the Majors' pen gave up one hit in the final four innings.

Zeppieri and Josh Williams each finished with two hits. 

Malik Williams' home run was his only hit, but extended his hitting streak to nine games. He has hits in 12 of the 13 games he has played in this season.

Kitchener has been outscored 33-30 in the last two games.

The Panthers fall to 6-10 on the season. London improved to 11-4.

Kitchener is home to Barrie for Father's Day on Sunday at 2 p.m.

GET YOUR TICKETS NOW and #PackTheJack!

In operation since 1986, the Community Legal Clinic of York Region (“CLCYR”) is a non-profit organization dedicated to access to justice and poverty reduction by providing free legal services to the unrepresented. Funded by Legal Aid Ontario and York Region, the Clinic’s work includes summary legal advice, referrals, representation, public legal education, community development, and law reform initiatives. Areas covered include housing law and tenant rights, social assistance, employment law, and immigration law.

With its main office in Richmond Hill, and satellite locations in Georgina, Keswick, Maple, Markham, Newmarket, Vaughan, and Woodbridge, the CLCYR serves the largest population among the 71 non-profit legal clinics in Ontario and is the only clinic serving the York Region!

If you champion social justice and are looking for a meaningful way to give back to your community in a volunteer position that aligns with your skills, we invite you to apply to join the Board of Directors.

As a Director, you will leverage your expertise to guide the CLCYR in its mission to provide crucial legal support and advocate for access to justice for low-income and marginalized communities throughout Aurora, East Gwillimbury, Georgina, King, Markham, Newmarket, Richmond Hill, Vaughn, and Whitchurch-Stouffville.

The Board operates as a policy governance board, establishing organizational goals. Directors are responsible for setting the strategic direction of the CLCYR, overseeing the Executive Director, ensuring adequate financial resources, providing proper financial oversight, and protecting the legal and ethical integrity of the CLCYR.

Directors will serve a two-year term, with the option to seek two additional consecutive terms.

Board meetings are held on the third-to-last Thursday of each month from 7 to 9:30 PM. While most sessions are held virtually, select meetings will be held in person. Each Director is required to join one committee (e.g., Finance Committee, Policy and Governance Committee).

Directors are expected to attend all scheduled Board and committee meetings. Time commitment for this position is up to 10 hours monthly, including reviewing meeting materials, attending meetings, and email correspondence.

We seek candidates with knowledge of non-profit governance board structure, who appreciate working collaboratively in a team environment, and understand the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion.

We are particularly interested in applicants with experience and expertise in the area of Finance, along with other skills including:

• organizational leadership
• community development and advocacy
• strategy implementation
• change management
• communications and relationship management
• risk management and/or administration
• government knowledge

For more information about the Community Legal Clinic of York Region, please visit clcyr.on.ca.

For inquiries about the recruitment process, or to request further information about the Board, please send an email to nomination@clcyr.on.ca. A Board member from the Nominations Committee will contact you.

Please submit your current resume and cover letter to nomination@clcyr.on.ca. Only those submissions sent to this email will be considered for the recruitment process. The application deadline is Sunday, July 5, 2026 at 11:59 PM.

The post Community Legal Clinic of York Region appeared first on Capacity Canada.

Together, we hit our goal of hearing from over 2000 youth for the 2026 Youth Impact Survey! ♦

We also surpassed the number of youth we heard from in 2023. ♦

This has been a community-wide effort and we couldn’t have reached this goal without everyone’s contributions. Thank you to:

• all the youth who filled out the survey
• the 13 Youth Impact Survey Ambassadors who worked with us
• the young people who helped spread the word about the survey
• the partners and organizations who promoted the survey
• everyone else who helped to make this Youth Impact Survey a success

Stay tuned for information about the prize draw, volunteer letters, and what’s next for the data.

The post 2026 Youth Impact Survey – We heard from over 2000 youth! appeared first on Children and Youth Planning Table.

♦

Though it’s now part of the Heineken universe and is a brand that started about 160 years ago in Udine, in Friuli-Venezia Giulia in northeastern Italy, Moretti is a 4.6% ABV pale lager with a label that features artwork that I find quite quaint.

As far as beer-can art goes, I slot it into the same beer-label pantheon as the image of the rugged Polish shepherd you’ll find on a can of Tatra (which is named for a Polish sheepdog), a brand that is in the Żywiec group of beers, which is also part of Heineken (wouldn’t you know). You don’t have to go too far to find a dominant beer giant behind even the most quirky, obscure brands.

The origin story of Moretti Man, however, is as murky as a pint of stout and has been subject to no little debate and argument: was he the re-presentation of a mustachioed patio drinker that founding brewer Menazzi Moretti spied at the Trattoria Boschetti in Udine, in 1942, as reports have it?

Or, was he inspired by a 1939 photograph of a Tyrolean farmer from Thaur?

In the latter theory, easily available to peruse with an Internet search, there was apparently even a legal schmozzle when the German photographer, upon seeing Moretti advertising campaigns some years later, accused the brewer of stealing her intellectual property in the 1950s.

Such is the beery tall-tale. Either way, I love the beer, the hat and the ‘stache!

Check out my latest post Love the hat and ‘stache: that cool Moretti Man! from AndrewCoppolino.com.

As Luisa D'Amato also stated in today's K-W Record (front page) people's rage against regional councillors is starting to show.  Fortunately for the councillors the vast majority of them do not seriously believe that homeless people, unemployed people or handicapped people in any way really are people.  Of course they are politically astute enough not to say so in words other than by their votes which even then some just love to gussy up and gild the lily when they vote to kick the already downtrodden in the teeth or worse.

Conservatives are always careful to shield industry and business from their own excesses whether they be toxic dumping, unsafe labour practices, nickel and diming employees and or shorting hours at every opportunity, hiring discrimination, at work gender harassment, promotions based more on popularity and less on job performance etc. etc.

Housing policies including development taxes, land costs and disincentives to lower cost housing have all managed to fuel our housing crisis whereby decent housing now is only available to those with jobs paying in the upper 25% of wages. By decent housing I'm including apartments and other rental housing in good shape. Of course these same regional councillors would rather spend taxpayers dollars on more legal fighting than actually donate a small piece of regional land for a tent encampment as suggested by Justice Michael Gibson. Again kicking the less fortunate in the teeth makes them feel like they are special. 

Our regional councillors grossly failed female police officers a few years back when these officers were attempting to end the ongoing and clearly tolerated sexual harassment within the ranks. Even the female regional councillors shut their mouths and kept their heads down not wanting to be seen as aligning with lowly employees in their dispute with illegal police employment behaviours. Now the complete group of #*$#holes from senior management to sitting regional councillors apparently can't understand why our local police force are having troubles attracting qualified female candidates. Idiots!

Regarding our water troubles I see a couple of problems. Firstly LRT has seriously hindered our finances throughout the Region from fewer regional services such as transfer stations, fewer police in local townships (Woolwich), reduced garbage collection and most certainly greatly reduced water infrastructure maintenance. The second problem is what I call the Israeli-Trump syndrome. In our case it is the Developer- Regional government syndrome. They are both identical in that when the Israeli right wing divot Netanyahu yells "Jump"  U.S. President Trump yells "How high?". 

There are a few decent ones on that regional council. Perhaps five or six out of 16 in total. Start paying close attention as for example Luisa D'Amato (K-W Record) sometimes lists how specific councillors have voted on specific matters. There is an election this October and we need to desperately get rid of most of the old guard who view their job as exactly that: guarding the privilege of the already entitled in Waterloo Region . 

Following his victory at the UFC Freedom 250 event on the White House South Lawn last Sunday, Josh Hokit shouted, “Michelle Obama is a man! Am I right, America?” into the microphone.

Soon after, Dr. Ibram X. Kendi posted:

“One of the oldest racist ideas about Black women is that they are men. Enslavers deployed this racist idea to justify forcing Black women into the same heavy and backbreaking field labor as enslaved Black men. And now today, racist theorists have repeatedly used this idea to degrade prominent Black women, including Michelle Obama.”

While I hope you’ll never hear Hokit’s exact words in your workplace, you may encounter comments that rely on harmful tropes and stereotypes.

When that happens, speak up. Force the speaker to confront their bias with a phrase such as:

• What makes you say that?
• What led you to that conclusion?
• Tell me more.

And when you raise concerns about the behavior, you may hear someone try to explain it away with some form of “I’m sure they didn’t mean anything,” or “they’re like that with everyone.”

These reactions shift attention away from the harm caused and toward defending the speaker. Keep reading for an effective response to such a situation endorsed by eBay.

Share on Instagram, LinkedIn, or YouTube.

This week’s Better Allies content is sponsored by:

Inclusive leadership starts with communication. The words leaders choose, the stories organizations tell, and the conversations teams have shape culture every day. Double Forte helps organizations communicate with clarity, credibility, and purpose during the moments that matter most. Learn more at double-forte.com

After I recommended the phrase “We don’t do that here” in my June 5th newsletter, Estelle Jackson, a diversity and inclusion specialist at eBay, reached out to let me know they teach that phrase in their allyship training. She also shared another technique they teach:

Focus on impact, not intent.

For example,

• I know that wasn’t your intention, but can you see how that might feel from their perspective?
• I don’t think you meant any harm, but can you understand the impact those words could have?

Jackson explained that this approach helps people learn without feeling attacked and keeps the conversation centered on creating a workplace where everyone feels they belong.

Clarifying your pronouns is a simple but powerful act of support during Pride month and year-round. Whether you do this verbally or in an email signature, on a nametag, or as part of your video conference profile, you are helping to normalize sharing pronouns. This practice is helpful to genderfluid, transgender, and other nonbinary folks, who get loads of pushback on the pronoun issue overall.

A few years ago, Sinclair Sexsmith tweeted on this topic, saying:

“Dear cis people who put your pronouns on your ‘hello my name is’ nametags: Thank you. When you do that, I feel more comfortable putting they/them. And I feel much more comfortable talking to you, bc you already tell me you know a little about the gender binary.”

I’ll add an important caveat: please don’t say, “My preferred pronouns are …”. After all, pronouns are words that accurately describe someone, not simply preferences. Using them shouldn’t be seen as optional. Instead, say “My pronouns are …”.

While it’s important to share our pronouns, we shouldn’t require others to do so. (I’m thinking of meetings where someone says, “Everyone, introduce yourself and tell us your pronouns.”)

As Jeannie Gainsburg, author of The Savvy Ally: A Guide for Becoming a Skilled LGBTQ+ Advocate, explains:

“Asking people directly about their pronouns puts people on the spot, making it very uncomfortable for them if they don’t want to share. It can also offend some people who think that their pronouns should be obvious.”

In a previous newsletter, I shared three tips from Gainsburg’s book about gathering pronouns respectfully without insisting that anyone share them. You can find them under #5 in the October 14, 2022 newsletter.

A UK-based tech executive told me that his colleague, Mohamed, sent this message to their department chat:

“I’m still getting messages addressed to some guy called ‘Mohammed’ in the salutation, instead of Mohamed. This is probably just because of autocorrect, and sometimes it’s a pain to have to spell check the spellchecker. So, if that happens, could you add my name as ‘Mohamed’ in your spellchecker, or just use ‘Mo’? It’s a small nuisance, but it would really help with my identity crisis! 🤪”

Thank you. What a simple thing for us all to do. If you’re not sure how to add someone’s name to your spellchecker, search online for “how do I add a word to my spell check dictionary?”

That’s all for this week. I’m glad you’re on this journey with me,

Karen Catlin (she/her), Author of the Better Allies® book series

Copyright © 2026 Karen Catlin. All rights reserved.

Together, we can make a difference with the Better Allies® approach.

• Say thanks to Karen and buy her a coffee ☕ (Need a receipt for educational reimbursement? Reply to this email, and we’ll take care of it.)
• Sponsor an edition of this newsletter
• Follow @BetterAllies on Instagram, Medium, or YouTube. Or follow Karen Catlin on LinkedIn
• Read the Better Allies books
• Tell someone about these resources

Speak Up Against Harmful Tropes, and Other Actions for Allies was originally published in Code Like A Girl on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

♦

KITCHENER – On Bark at the Park night at Jack Couch Park, both the Panthers and the Brantford Red Sox showed some bite in scoring a CBL-high 37 runs scored.

But in the end, it was Kitchener scoring 23 runs - their highest single-game output in nine seasons - and dispatched the Sox 23-14 to snap a six-game losing skid. 

The preparation played a big factor, according to Panthers manager Pete Kiefer, who said the team put in some great practices since their 7-6 defeat in Guelph on Saturday.

“We had a harder workday on Tuesday, and a lighter day yesterday," he said before the game. "A few of the guys even had showed up earlier this morning to put some extra work in."

That work paid off with six home runs, and a nine-run fourth inning, an inning where they sent 14 batters to the plate.

Malik Williams went four-for-four with two home runs and seven RBI to lead the way.

His first came in the first inning, his third of the season, a two-run shot to open the scoring.

Zane Skansi hit his first career CBL home run in the home half of the second. And they weren't done. Petey Kiefer hit a solo shot onto Ottawa Street to give the Panthers a 4-0 lead early.

Kitchener poured it on with three more runs in the third and ballooned the lead to 16-0 after four innings.

Evan Elliott tied a season-high with six innings of work in the win. He gave up two runs on five hits, striking out three and walking one.

Raffi Gross and Yosvani Penalver also had home runs for Kitchener.

Brantford didn't go away quietly though.

Chris Ortega had a two home run game for the Sox, and Lucas Bateman had his first career home run.

The visitors scored eight runs off Brett Reid in the ninth inning in a game that lasted three hours and 38 minutes.

But in the end, Jake Liberta came in and struck out three to finish it off and improve Kitchener's record to 6-9 on the season. Brantford dropped to 3-8.

With a matchup with the Majors in London Friday night, the Panthers will be back in action at Jack Couch Park on Sunday, June 21 against the Barrie Baycats for a Father’s Day matinee. First pitch is scheduled for 2:05 p.m.

GET YOUR TICKETS NOW and #PackTheJack!

The post Canada Day appeared first on Grand River Rocks Climbing Gym.

The post Canada Day appeared first on Grand River Rocks Climbing Gym.

Recently (yesterday?) I mentioned Woolwich's Double Whammy against citizens of Waterloo Region. While Waterloo and Cambridge are no slouches in the industrial pollution department I believe that little Woolwich Township is the double prize winner as in # 1  for worst polluted site i.e. Uniroyal/Lanxess in Elmira and they are also # 2  i.e. Safety-Kleen in Breslau. Now do keep in mind that while Safety-Kleen are and have been legally liable for the environmental state of their site, incoming PCBs and all, nevertheless it is my expectation that the bulk of the environmental discharges, emissions and general pigginess can be attributed to the owners of the site before them as mentioned in yesterday's post here.

Regarding Polysesouvient, the very active anti private firearms ownership lobby, I have to point out that there is a very solid rebuttal in today's K-W Record under Letters To The Editor by a Mr. Dennis Watson of Waterloo titled "Report not what it looks like".  He points out that the relevant RCMP 2024 report ignored 60% of the Canadian statistics as neither Ontario nor Quebec numbers were included. This is because unlike many of the other provinces these two provinces have their own municipal police forces in almost all communities/cities and  I believe that the O.P.P. covers the rest. Also for the provinces and locations where the RCMP are the only police force present, Mr. Watson states that "...a third of the guns recovered could not be traced,". Personally I must also add that here in Ontario both our biggest and most crime troubled city (Toronto)  has had their municipal police force go on the public record as saying that removing firearms from registered and licensed owners will not lessen crime. The Ontario Provincial Police (O.P.P.) have also publicly said the same thing as well as suggesting that indeed the large majority of illegal firearms involved in crime in Ontario are smuggled here from the United States.

Getting back to dirty polluters let me advise readers of the following. In my younger days I travelled on foot extensively and sometimes took self guided tours of various regional contaminated sites.  Somehow I do not recall if I had written or verbal permission all the time although I do recall to Mr. Ron Stroh's credit he personally did give me permission on one occasion to tour his property on the immediate east side of Uniroyal/Lanxess .  It is truly amazing what an observant person can learn by walking a contaminated site. Also way back when Rich Clausi coined the phrase the "Full Aerial Response Team" (FART) when the Ministry of Environment demanded to know how we obtained photographs or possibly environmental samples of this and that.

I have seen first hand gross pollution on the Safety-Kleen site. I and everybody else has certainly smelled it over the decades. I have also obtained hydrogeological reports from decades ago describing the gross sub-surface pollution obviously caused by either spillage or dumping or both. I have a few months back sent data and pictures to relevant environmental researchers. I know how serious the ground and groundwater contamination has been and likely still is between the operating area and the Grand River. Much of this property was and maybe still is part of I believe the Forwell (gravel) Pit. I also have work connections decades ago to employees at Forwells. There was limited attempts at hydraulic containment of a very small part of the site decades ago in an attempt to keep the PCBs floating on top of the shallow aquifer (also known as LNAPLS) from migrating downgradient en masse to the Grand River.  

I expect yet another phony sham of an Environmental Assessment to "prove" exactly what the Region and Safety-Kleen want which is something giving the guilty parties the good housekeeping seal of approval.