I am beyond thrilled to tell you guys that I am accepting a new job! I work in the United States for a county position and where I work right now is very stressful and a lot of people are already leaving because of it. I’m taking on the duties of two or three people because of one leaving. My supervisor is not the nicest to me except for the last few days when I told her a family member was just diagnosed with a serious illness. Anyway, the new job is another county position but in a much better location and better environment and better work life, etc. The best part of all this is my seniority and vacation and sickleave and insurance transfers over as if I just walked down the hall to get a new job. Pay is just slightly lower but that’s ok because it’s plenty for me and a lot less stress.
I’m just overwhelmed and stressed out over not receiving much training for a lot of stuff I’ve been given to do currently (stuff that was someone else’s job before they left). Anyway, I have a very respectful letter to give my boss tomorrow to give my resignation for two weeks. Please give me any advice on how to handle this without it being too dramatic! Obviously, I’m scared that she is going to be very upset and treat me like dirt for two weeks. Anyone out there tell me how to not let that bother me? I appreciate any personal experiences and encouragement you can give me!

Hi everyone,
I recently interviewed at my dream "next step" job and they essentially waitlisted me (position was filled due to an internal transfer), telling me that I passed company standards, that I was a great fit and if there were an opening for similar job I wouldn't have to interview again. The problem is, I have another offer for a company that is "ok" in comparison. Company 1, IF i were to receive an offer, would be around a $180-200K total comp and company 2 would be around $90K (which is still more than I'm making now). I really want to wait for company 1 but there really is no guarantee on if I get one or what the timeline...should I take company 2's offer or wait?

(I am not a creationist, but I am a bored contrarian and I need to argue with somebody right now. Also, I'm trying to get a better grasp of the rules of phylogeny, so maybe y'all can teach me something.).
Reasons that I think the LUCA was an animal:
1: Unicellularity is hard. We have this idealized conception of a unicellular microbe, where you stick a single cell on a petri dish and then overnight it becomes a million cells, but the vast majority of life can't do anything like this--certainly the LUCA couldn't, right? I think there would be an advantage to early life being multicellular, in that early life could "borrow" RNA/DNA/proteins with neighboring cells. Also they wouldn't need a full complement of molecular machinery if their neighbor can help out, even if their neighbor is a different species. Just like I can borrow my neighbor's stove if I'm making a special meal, early life probably borrowed very basic molecular machinery from the neighboring cell. And if any of their genes broke, they could maybe get a replacement from their neighbor? I think that it's hard to live all by your lonesome self if you're a primitive life form, so being multicellular is easier since you can rely on neighbor cells for various things and don't have to do everything yourself. I also think there's a very blurry line between a single multicellular organism and an interdependent community of unicellular organisms where none of the organisms could survive without the others. Many scientists agree that early life was like this—an interdependent community—and much life still is like this. But why should this type of community be considered to be closer to unicellularity than multicellularity?
2: The nucleus seems like a leftover relic from the RNA world. The primary function seems to be to separate transcription and translation, but why would you want to do this in a DNA organism? Why are you separating transcription from translation if you already have this elegant system in prokaryotes of just having the ribosome and the RNA polymerase right next to each other doing their things almost simultaneously, much, much faster and more efficiently than eukaryotes. Why make everything ten times slower by evolving a nucleus when you could just not evolve a nucleus? Evolution doesn’t plan ahead, and I fail to see how the nucleus is a favorable adaptation in the short term. On the other hand, a nucleus makes a ton of sense for an organism with an RNA genome because you'd need a way to separate your genomic RNA from your RNA transcripts so they could be regulated separately -- You wouldn't want to splice up or run a ribosome over your RNA genome, that would be a disaster.
3: Having a nucleus would make it easier to evolve DNA. Whatever enzyme is deoxygenating the RNA backbone wouldn't run into the problem of accidentally deoxygenating the RNA transcripts. Since the transcripts are outside the nucleus.
4: The nucleus could be an early form of cell specialization for a multicellular life form. If we think of the nucleus as a separate cell from the cytoplasmic space, I think the picture of early RNA life becomes clearer. Some cells/compartments evolve to specialize in replication and transcription -- these become the nucleus -- wheras other cells/compartments become specialized for translation of proteins --these became the cytoplasmic space, which ultimately engulfed the nucleus. In this primitive RNA organism, there would have been little distinction between replication and transcription. The cells of various sizes would have shared proteins, allowing the smaller cells specialized for replication/transcription to still benefit from the gene products being produced in the larger cells specialized for translation. The smaller cells would do a more faithful job of replicating the genome and not have to risk damaging their genes in the messy process of gene expression.
5: Based on the multiple chromosomes in the nucleus, the first Eukaryote was a likely a synthesis of multiple organisms. Multiple organisms implies multicellular. If we look inside the nucleus, we see multiple, weird, x-shaped chromosomes, with a bunch of dumb hacks (centrosomes, telomerase, etc) to keep them from falling apart as they replicate. The bacterial system makes so much more sense for modern organisms -- just having a single circular chromosome: simple, elegant, effective. Again, the eukaryotic system seems like a molecular fossil from an earlier era where these features were actually necessary. I'd argue that the eukaryotic system supports multiple chromosomes because the original chromosomes were the RNA genomes of different interdependent organisms that lived in a multicellular community. Their RNA migrated into a single nucleus for better regulated and better synchronized replication of the community genes.
6: The homologies between Porifera and Amoebozoa make no sense if Animals came from Choanoflagellates. It is widely assumed that multicellular eukaryotes evolved from single-celled eukaryotes, and this seems to be the case in land plants, at least, since they're so similar to algae which obviously came before land plants--but are we sure that it isn't the other way around for animals? Conventional wisdom is that animals evolved from choanoflagellates, and we see very similar cells to choanoflagellates in Porifera called choanocytes. BUT: Porifera (sponges) also have amoebocytes, which look and function a lot like amoebas. Amoebas are believed to be relatively closely related to animals, although not as closely related as choanoflagellates. Yet animals cannot have evolved from both amoebas and choanoflagellates, and choanoflagellates look nothing like amoebas. Isn't it an odd coincidence that amoebocyte cells in sponges are so much like amoebas? If animals came from choanoflagellates, then the similarity of amoebas and amoebocytes would have to be a coincidence. An alternative direction of evolution makes a lot more sense to me: Animals came first, and amoebas and choanoflagellates are separate lineages of reduced animals that have evolved down to only being a single cell. Other eukaryotes (such as fungi, algae and plants) could be evolved from these single-celled descendants of animals.
7: Gene homologies between microsporidia and prokaryotes. Since microsporidia are very obviously reduced fungi, this makes no sense in the current prokaryote-first paradigm, so these gene homologies are handwaved away as being the result of horizontal gene transfer. But what if it isn't horizontal gene transfer? Microsporidia is a parasitic clade of fungi which has lost most of its genes, seemingly lost its mitochondria (are we absolutely sure they ever had mitochondria?) and shrunk to about the size of a bacterium. Its shrunk so much and lost so many genes that it actually is able to withstand mutations to very basic molecular machinery such as its ribosomes, which are very different from the ribosomes of other eukaryotes and seem more similar to the smaller ribosomes of prokaryotes. Perhaps prokaryotes are just even-further-reduced microsporidia that have lost their nucleus, circularized their DNA (which can also happen in cancer cells, google "eccDNA") and further streamlined their molecular machinery.
8: We can learn a lot about the order of the clades from the type of ecological niches they currently occupy. For example: there do exist extremophile bacteria, so there's nothing inherent in bacterial microbiology that prevents them from evolving into extremophiles. So why do we see mostly extremophile archaea, but bacteria occupy almost all of the generalist, high productivity microbial niches? I'd argue: Probably, archaea had a head start in evolving specialized adaptations for extremophile environments. Probably, archaea came first. Imagine an archaeon existing before there were any bacteria, and it evolved to occupy all microbe ecological niches. Then bacteria came along in a new adaptive radiation with superior molecular biology. They were able to supplant archaea from most generalist niches but haven't been able to challenge archaea for extremophile niches for which archaea have specialized genes and specialized adaptations. And neither bacteria nor archaea seriously challenge eukaryotes for the larger ecological niches which require even more specialized adaptations. This to me implies that Eukaryotes came first, archaea came second, and bacteria are the most recent domain.
9: Animals almost exclusively occupy the large, complex, predator niche. I'd argue that the large predator niche, of all ecological niches, is the one where the greatest advantage is given to the organism who evolves to fill the niche first. Because selection pressure changes a lot once the predator appears: Things that can't run away from the predator are forced to make themselves as unappetizing as possible. So they can't have complex proteins, since complex proteins = tastier. So how can any clade evolve into a predator if there already exists a predator clade that could eat it? The fossil record seems to think: It can’t. Throughout the entire fossil record for which we have good records (since the Cambrian), the predator is always an animal. Never does a slime mold or a fungus something evolve muscles and teeth and start competing with animals for the predator niche. But this isn’t 100% true -- you have Venus fly traps, I suppose? So that’s one exception, the only one I can think of. Animal predators today have billions of years of evolutionary head start evolving such things as muscles, a nervous system, circulatory system, etc. If anything else other than an animal starts evolving complex structures or energy storage, it's only going to make itself tastier to an animal. The predator is also the niche that cares the least about the efficiency of basic molecular processes -- it doesn't need to be efficient when the world is its buffet. For this reason, I'd argue that the predator clade must have established itself very early. Probably the kingdom that occupies the apex predator niche at any given time is the absolute oldest lineage of multicellular life. Because long, long after all the original autotrophs have gone extinct, replaced with things that don't waste so much energy and have more efficient and streamlined molecular biology, the apex predator clade would remain on its throne, since nothing, I'd argue, would be able to compete with its evolutionary head start evolving so many complex adaptations for multicellularity. Are we to believe there was ever a time when the apex predator niche was something other than an animal? It's difficult to imagine. If that apex predator was a prokaryote, what is it about animal molecular biology that allowed it to overcome such extreme odds and supplant that prokaryote as the apex predator?
10: The fossil record of animals before the Cambrian is probably very incomplete. The first complex animals in the fossil record (the cambrian explosion) seem very, very advanced already -- I think this is a representation that our fossil record is incomplete and animals are a much older clade than they seem. Since predators are rarer in an ecosystem, and may have been even rarer when energy was scarcer due to less oxygen in the atmosphere (early heterotrophic life likely breathed sulfur compounds), we may simply not have any good fossils of animals from before the cambrian.
11: It's also possible that early animals simply weren't made out of the right material to fossilize. Maybe Archean-eon animals had no bones or anything like that and so they didn't fossilize, so we don't have examples of them. We can't assume that just because you don't find fossilized animals from ~3 billion years ago doesn't mean they weren't around then. And even if we did find fossilized animals from that long ago, they were probably so radically different from modern animals that we might misidentify them. For example, we have many fossils of strange creatures from billions of years ago, nobody knows what they are. Maybe they are animals? Example: Google “Grypania”. Currently there is a debate on whether these are algae or bacteria. But they are quite large, and they look sortof wormlike, so, in my view, there’s no reason they couldn’t be primitive animals.
12: Animals are slow reproducing but have the most sophisticated adaptations for multicellularity. The slower something reproduces, the slower it evolves, since there’s less opportunities for mutations. So how did animals have time to acquire so many complex adaptations for multicellularity? They must be an especially ancient lineage, something that has been multicellular much longer than anything else – otherwise they wouldn’t have had time to acquire so many complex adaptations for multicellularity.
13: Phylogenetic trees based on bioinformatics suffer from "long branch attraction" artefacts -- where fast reproducing, simple, and numerous organisms group together at the base of the tree. This is a well-known problem for making phylogenetic trees. Since prokaryotes are so much more numerous and reproduce so much faster than eukaryotes, it’s natural that they would have the most genetic diversity, even if they evolved later. The appearance of prokaryotes at the base of the tree of life derived from bioinformatics algorithms may be a product of long branch attraction.
14: Counterpoints on mitochondrias. I’ll admit that mitochondrias do look a lot like bacterial symbiotes, but that doesn't necessarily mean the original eukaryotes had mitochondrias. Once alphaproteobacteria evolved, it might have infected many lineages of eukaryotes simultaneously, since nothing had resistance to its infections yet. Maybe it impersonated the mitosome and supplanted its function, and did such a good job as a mitosome that the only surviving eukaryotic lineages are ones with alphaproteobacterial infections. Also, if we assume that bacteria are reduced eukaryotes, then many of the gene homologies for mitochondria associated genes could have been present in the eukaryotic LUCA, and perhaps they were used for regulating the mitosome which preceded mitochondrias. I think that the mitochondria is an interesting piece of the puzzle, but it doesn't conclusively demonstrate that prokaryotes came first.
….
I make ASCII phylogenetic tree for fun:

 _______________________________________________Placazoa 1____LUCA_____________________________________________5_____Ctenophora _______Cnidaria ___Bilateria ______________________________________________Porifera _____________Choanoflagellatea _________Dinoflagellata _______Algae ____Viridiplantae __2___________________________________Amoebozoa _________________________________Fungi _3_______Microsporidia __4____Archaea ^ ______Bacteria (endosymbiosis into various eukaryotic clades) _____Mitochondria ^ (horizontal gene transfer from now-extinct RNA life forms to bacteria and archaea) ______________________primitive RNA life forms (extinct) 1: A community of highly interdependent organisms evolves into multicellular eukaryotic progenator with a DNA genome inside a nucleus. This hypothetical LUCA is a relatively large and complex heterotroph which fed on primitive RNA life forms. 2: First truely unicellular (non-colonial) organisms (independent living isn't easy!) 3: Extreme miniaturization 4: Loss of eukaryotic nucleus 5: Complex adaptations for apex predator niches (neurons, etc) 

Hey guys, I've been working at the same company as a Software Engineer for a few years (part time, but with significant hours per week), where I also worked on some MLE/DS projects and will finish my MSc in CS (Data Science specialization) soon, during which I also published some academic papers. I've had a great offer from a company nearby that wants to hire me as a MLE/Data Scientist, and are offering me a ~35% raise compared to my current job, as well as super interesting MLE projects to work on (which is the main reason I did the MSc). The only thing is: as it's a new job, I will start with a 1 year contract (with normally this just transfers to indefinite after that year - this is just company policy), where as with my current company I have an indefinite contract.
At the same time I feel like not making the switch now will make it harder for me in the future to switch from SWE to MLE/DS (whereas the opposite seems much easier, given my prior strong SWE experience and the fact that MLE also involves writing high quality software).
TL;DR: Switch to much more interesting work that I've done a MSc for specifically and also get paid ~35% more but switching from indefinite to year contract worth the risk? I think it is, also given the number of recruiters sending me messages on LinkedIn for other opportunities that I'm not currently interested in, but would like your opinions.
Thanks!

The IT industry offers a vast array of certifications, each promising to catapult your career to new heights. However, with so many options, selecting the right one can be a daunting task.
Paid Certification Exam Help:
If you are unable to pass any of your IT Certification Exam, get paid help from Online Helpers at Hiraedu!
Contact Details for Hiraedu Helper:
WhatsApp: +1 (213) 594-5657
Call: +1 727 456 9641
Website: hiraedu. com
Email: info@hiraedu. com
To make an informed decision, it's essential to understand the differences between vendor-specific and vendor-neutral certifications.
Vendor-Specific Certifications
Vendor-specific certifications focus on specific technologies, products, or software platforms, such as:

• Cisco (CCNA, CCNP, CCIE)
• Microsoft (MCSA, MCSE, MCSD)
• AWS (Solutions Architect, Developer, SysOps Administrator)

These certifications demonstrate expertise in a particular tool or platform, showcasing your ability to work with specific technologies. However, the skills acquired may not be transferable to similar products from other vendors. Additionally, the specific product or technology may become obsolete, requiring costly and time-consuming reskilling with other vendor-specific certifications.
Vendor-Neutral Certifications
Vendor-neutral certifications, on the other hand, focus on best practices and concepts in areas like:

• Security (CompTIA Security+, CISSP)
• Project Management (CompTIA Project+, PMP)
• Networking (CompTIA Network+, Cisco CCNA)

These certifications showcase your adaptability, versatility, and knowledge of industry-standard concepts, making you highly employable across various companies and industries.
CompTIA: The Leading Vendor-Neutral Certification Provider
CompTIA is a trusted and well-established provider of vendor-neutral certifications, offering a range of certifications that meet industry-standard requirements for hiring practices. Many CompTIA certifications are recognized by government agencies and are a prerequisite for IT jobs in these sectors.
Cyber Security Certifications
If you aspire to become a cyber security expert, consider the following certifications:

• CompTIA Security+ (entry-level): A foundational certification covering security basics, risk management, and incident response.
• SANS GIAC Information Security Fundamentals (GISF) (entry-level): An entry-level certification providing an overview of risk management and defense-in-depth techniques.
• EC-Council Certified Ethical Hacker (CEH) (intermediate): An intermediate-level certification for IT security professionals who want to demonstrate their skills in ethical hacking and penetration testing.
• (ISC)2 Systems Security Certified Practitioner (SCCP) (intermediate): An intermediate-level certification for established IT security professionals with solid experience working in information security and familiarity with policies and procedures.
• (ISC)2 Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP) (advanced): An advanced certification for IT security professionals with at least five years of experience in the field, covering security and risk management, asset security, and software development security.

Choosing the right certification depends on your career goals, current skill level, and desired area of expertise. Consider the cost, time commitment, and how valuable the certification will be to current and potential employers. By selecting the appropriate certification, you can enhance your IT career, increase your earning potential, and stay competitive in the ever-evolving IT industry.

I know, I know “don’t shit where you eat.” I don’t intend to do this again but I’m in a bit of a pickle.
Advice is welcome.
So I (32f) was in a serious 2.5 year with a man (28) who worked in a different department at my current job. About 1.5 years into the relationship, he transferred to a different site for work-related purposes. We were still together when he decided to change locations. Also… thinking the relationship would last we moved in together a year ago.
Unfortunately we broke up months after living together (after Thanksgiving). We are on good terms and agreed to remain living together until the lease is done. Advice is not needed for this part, I’m just sharing for context.
Problem is shortly after we started dating, we were open about being together with other staff in the building, including my coworkers. I didn’t think much of it at the time because we were all in looove and everyone thought we were such a cute couple blah blah. So it was cool people knew. But we are very much not together anymore and now it’s just me left at job site.
These days, I get asked about him at work from time to time. In passing people say “how is your boyfriend” “is he treating you good?” “tell your boyfriend I said hi.” These are usually random conversations and I will answer briefly to at least get them off my back but I don’t want to pretend we’re together I just don’t know if I should start saying “actually we broke up, but I’ll tell him you said ‘hey!’”
Should I update them that we broke up or just go along with it for now? I don’t necessarily care if they know we broke up, I’m just not sure if it’s wise to do and if I let them know, how to make it least awkward as possible. I guess I’m just wary about the potential awkwardness after telling them.
Also, this is not a forever-job I am finishing up undergrad by the end of this year and plan to look for work in a different industry shortly after.
TLDR: ex bf and I had a public romantic relationship at the job, we moved in, then broke up late last year. Also, he is no longer at the site with me. I am struggling to know if I should update everyone (when the topic comes up) or should I continue going along with it?

Hi all! For context, I did Running Start (program allows you to take college classes in high school) + after graduating I finished taking my general classes at community college and got my AA.. didn't get the best GPA. I had a 2.7 then transferred to a highly ranked university in my state and completed my Bachelor's in Social Work with a 3.4. I know that's not completely terrible and my increased GPA demonstrates that I was able to make an improvement in my academics + performance. I have diagnosed ADHD but chose not to be medicated. I've read other reddits where people say not to mention ADHD or mental health as why their GPA wasn't the highest, due to that being so widely used in purpose statements.
I graduated in 2018 and have worked different roles in multiple industries but nothing directly in social services. I've done some volunteering for a local women's shelter. I just started a position in non-profit in transportation which isn't remotely in the direction that I want to land in but being laid off for a year really sucked. At this point, the approach I've taken with my current position is that it's just a job and not my life. However, I am the type of person that is driven by passion and need to be doing work that I'm passionate about. Which has really steered me in the direction of looking into graduate programs to get myself in a position of doing work that aligns with my interests/passions.
I went back and forth about going back for grad school for years but I never felt certain enough about my intended career path. Now, at 27 going on 28, I can say that I KNOW I want to work as a therapist/counselor at a school, private practice or community practice space.
My main concerns are:

• GPA
  • I just don't know how competitive of an applicant I'll be due to my GPA
• Lack of extracurriculars
  • Didn't really get involved in anything in undergrad, just wanted to be in and out
• Not enough direct working experience in Social Work/Mental Health field
• Finances + tuition
  • I've looked into the cost of most grad schools and they are a pretty penny :')
  • I don't know if I'll get any tuition assistance due to not having the highest academic standing
  • I've heard of assistantships + teaching assistant roles that could help alleviate the costs

Any word of advice from anyone that has completed their degree in either of these fields or someone that is in the field? Thanks all!

Season 3
Fukushima entered the second tier of Japanese football, the J2 league, for the first time in their history and they were looking to make their mark where as I was finally moving out of my hotel and into a lovely apartment in Fukushima itself, admittedly, not far from where the hotel was but at least this was mine! And with a new season, brought new faces, AML Jung Ji-Yong came in on a free transfer along with striker Serinsariu Joppu following his release from V-Varen Nagasaki, Kiyotaka Hayashi was an aging CB and Taiki Hirato was reinforcement for the AMR position both on free transfers, the only money spent was Ghanaian striker Clinton Osei, a humoungus £34k from Romanian outfit Marosvasarhelyi, I'll leave the pronunciation of that one to you. Masashi Wada and Naoto Miki went out the door for £220k and £190k respectively. Meaning I had repaired Fukushima's financial issues that I definitely did not not cause and you can't prove it.
The season started as the previous ended with victories over Tochigi SC and Yokohama S Marino's with Yuto Nobe scoring 4 out of our 6 goals so far, we were flying high, riding a wave of confidence and belief, but let me tell you something brother, the walls came crashing down and it hurt both inside and out, we went 6 games without a win, Nobe couldn't hit a barn door with a bazooka and we were falling down the table despite our positive start. Included in this was a 2-2 home draw with Yokohama S Marino's in the YBC Levian cup and we were staring down the barrel of being less than mediocre, that would be fine for a consolidation season right?
We sat and waited for the arrival of Thespa Gunma, at the time top of the table to come put another nail in our coffin and they were on the verge of pulling the dirt over ourselves as we went 2-0 down. Now, I don't know what is in the water of Fukushima (Radiation probably) but Nobe clearly drank more than his fair share as he helped his team mates with 2 assists and himself to 4 goals, leaving us running out 6-2 winners. We continued our exploits in the Levian cup beating Yokohama Marino's 5-3 in the second leg showing that the team were truely starting to believe in my score one more than you philosophy. Klopp fancies himself some Heavy Metal football, this was some kind of crossbreed between heavy metal and Japanese fastidiousness creating a new kind of metal, a BabyMetal if you will.
Following this our form became inconsistent a couple of wins followed by a few losses, very few draws though and continuing through both cup competitions, up next was Grulla Morioka in the YBC Levian cup round of 16. We lost the first leg 2-1 at their place before bringing them back to Toho stadium, where a 3-1 victory pushed us into the quarter finals. Up next would be Tokushima Vortis in the second round of the Emperors Cup but before that, something happened.
J1 side Kyoto Sanga were struggling in the league above us, in the relegation zone and having sacked their long standing manager Sang-Hyun Kim were willing to take a chance on a young(ish) Englishman who'd proven himself in the lower leagues of Japanese football and on the grill of McDonald's. An interview was offered and, of course, I attended, as stated in part 2, my skin was turning purple already.
Clearly, my potential defection affected the players as we were knocked out of the Emperors cup by Tokushima in a 2-1 loss for us. The next day, I was offered the job at Kyoto Sanga. I said my farewells, packed my bags, and hopped on the first high-speed train to Kyoto.
I'd only just unpacked.....

I have been scouring the internet all day and I just can't seem to find the right information. First of all, I'm 33F and wanting to go back to school in general. I went to community college after HS and ultimately only received a certificate (in Polysomnography, which I am still in that field). But I was looking at my transcripts and I have a total of 63 credits. (I originally was going for graphic design so most classes probably would go toward an Associates of Arts?). I cannot remember why I didn't get my Associates at the same time. I think I was a class or two short and decided to deal with it later-which never happened since I immediately started working after my certification. Now my only option is to transfer these credits somewhere else because it's been too long (plus I need online options).
Currently, I want an entire new career. I have plans to get credits on Study.com and Sophia so I can transfer them to WGU to get a Bachelors in Computer Science (plan is subject to change since I'm not 100% sure what I want to do). I doubt a lot of my original credits will not even be applicable toward a tech degree though.
I guess my question is...is there any way I can easily and affordably get my Associates since it seems I was so close to that? Should I forget the Associates altogether and focus on my plan to get my BS? I just feel it is a shame to waste all those art classes. Could someone at WGU help me even though my AA issue is completely separate from my pursuit of the BS?
Sorry if this is confusing. My brain is a bit broken at the moment. Thanks for any advice in advance! I work full time and everything needs to be done in my free time/online.
Edit: I have a good GPA (3.5)...idk if that helps.
Edit2: In an ideal world, I would utilize many of these credits toward a degree in the Arts, but I am in a dead end job and high pay is more important to me than passion. I want a life that will let me pursue passions through hobbies and travel, I don't want that to be my career. Money for schooling in general is also a huge factor for me.

Im currently a student at TCC and I'm in the TCC2FSU transfer program, I'm also majoring in Computer Science BA. I feel kind of behind because I have very little experience in some languages, like python and javascript. I'm currently trying to self learn these and some other languages. I have one more semester until I transfer to FSU and I'm nervous that I won't be prepared for internships or the classes at FSU. Which scares me more because then I fear I won't be able to get a job after college. So, do you think FSU is really good when it comes to preparing students for after college?

StonedVader deleted from /borrow

• Flair: COMPLETED
• Link to the deleted post
• Was a selfpost with score: 1
• Submitted 2020-01-04 02:06 (UTC)
• Was up for for approx 1591.79 days
• Probably deleted within the past 21.92 days
  • Was last seen up around 2024-04-21 22:54 (UTC)
  • Deletion detected at 2024-05-13 21:05 (UTC)

Active loans

• redditloans.com mobile search
• Could not fetch loan data from redditloans.com (error?)

Quick search

• Search for all deleted posts by this author

Title

[REQ] ($95 ) - (#Tallahassee, FL, US), (Repayment $110 1/10/19), (Venmo/Zelle/CashApp)

Post contents

Without getting lengthy for this post, I'm a bit of a messed up situation, and I'm stuck in Florida until Sunday night. I'm transferring to a university up in AL from CA, and plans changed last minute therefore I had to basically spent what I had left in my account on new travel arrangements.I really just need money to cover my baggage for my greyhound trip to AL, uber to campus, and food. I covered my hotel for tomorrow night and my greyhound ticket but aside from that I'm basically tapped out until I get my final check from my last job on the 10th. I would greatly appreciate the help.

Round 1, Pick 23 - Brian Thomas Jr., WR, LSU:
NFL: After the departure of Calvin Ridley in free agency, the Jaguars were determined to find a physical, fast receiver who could give them a vertical element in the pass game. They found it in Thomas, a stud who found the end zone 17 times last season for LSU. This is a big addition for Trevor Lawrence and Co.
CBS Sports: B+. This is a heck of a move for a team that needs another young weapon. He can fly and his best football is in front of him. Watch out for their offense in 2024.
ESPN: Thomas is one of the biggest (6-foot-3, 209 pounds) and fastest receivers in the draft (4.33 40-yard dash at the combine). His production in the SEC was elite in 2023: 17.3 yards per catch, 17 TD catches. He gives the Jaguars something they haven't had since Allen Robinson II (2014-17): Someone who can go up and get 50-50 balls and provide a big red-zone target. The Jaguars threw few end-zone fade routes the past several seasons, but that should change with Thomas, who had 10 TD catches on go or fade routes last season, the second-most in FBS to Rome Odunze.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Enjoys the Browns, Texans, and Vikings and this pick had it all.
Round 2, Pick 48 - Maason Smith, DT, LSU:
NFL: When I spoke to Smith last week, he made sure to highlight his workout with the Jaguars -- his final team visit -- as clearly his best. The Jags agreed. Smith has first-round tools but has been beset by injuries and a rotating cast of defensive coaches at LSU. His production is lacking, but his potential is downright exciting. If they're patient, the Jaguars might have something here.
CBS Sports: B-. Highly touted recruit who dealt with injuries and never quite met hype in college. Tall, sleek interior player who flashes that big-recruit talent at times just not ultra consistent. Won’t be limited athletically in the NFL. Rushes get far too high, which saps his power. Nice arm over but really his only move. Fills a need.
ESPN: The Jaguars needed to bolster their run defense, which faded down the stretch in 2023, and get younger on the defensive line. The 6-foot-5, 306-pounder can play inside as well as at defensive end, which gives the Jaguars some versatility along the front with Roy Robertson-Harris and DaVon Hamilton. Hamilton had a disappointing season in 2023 because of a back infection and he never reached the level he did in 2022, which earned him a contract extension. The Jaguars also released NT Folorunso Fatukasi this spring after two disappointing seasons, so adding depth along the defensive front was a priority.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: His record in the fuzzy bunny challenge is 19.
Round 3, Pick 96 - Jarrian Jones, CB, Florida State:
NFL: Measuring nearly 6-feet and running a 4.38-second 40-yard dash helped Jones' cause quite a bit. He has inside and outside experience but likely will be a nickel corner in the NFL. I thought he was a Day 3 prospect because of his short arms and long injury history, but Jones has gone up against talented receivers and won some battles.
CBS Sports: B. Taller than most nickel CBs but has requisite twitch and possesses the vertical juice to carry deep routes. Change of direction is very good but just not consistent. Tends to get his pads high when trying to ID the play, which saps his quickness. Unreliable tackler. Good ball skills and destroys screens on regular basis.
ESPN: The 6-foot, 190-pound Jones lined up primarily in the slot in 2023, so that's where he'll start with the Jaguars. The Jaguars signed CB Ronald Darby in free agency to play on the outside opposite Tyson Campbell. Head coach Doug Pederson said at the owners meetings that Darnell Savage Jr., whom they also signed in March, would be playing nickel, so Jones joins the rotation there along with Antonio Johnson. Jones has good speed (he ran 4.38 in the 40 at the combine) and has played outside at FSU at times as well, but the team has confidence that Darby can be the starter.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Rolex? Bulova? Omega? Patek Philippe? This man is CASIO all the way.
Round 4, Pick 114 - Javon Foster, OT, Missouri:
NFL: Foster has excellent experience at left tackle, and he looked facile at right tackle at the Senior Bowl. He's not an exceptional athlete but has good length, is patient in pass protection and can quietly get the job done. He's likely a swing tackle to start out.
CBS Sports: B+. College OT who has the frame to stay there but maybe not the overall athletic profile. Power and quick-setting skills shine. Can win ugly and importantly shows recovery skill. This is a smart investment. Just gets the job done on a routine basis.
ESPN: The Jaguars have only one offensive tackle under contract beyond this season (right Anton Harrison) so this was a position the Jaguars needed to address. Foster started 39 games at left tackle and two at right tackle at Missouri but he won't be asked to play in 2024 unless there are injuries to left tackle Cam Robinson and swing tackle Walker Little -- or the Jaguars decide to trade Robinson, in which case the 24-year-old Foster could become the swing tackle as a rookie.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Spends all day writing letters to bring back Club Penguin.
Round 4, Pick 116 - Jordan Jefferson, DT, LSU:
NFL: That's the third LSU player the Jags have selected, and the fourth SEC player. Jefferson is one of three Tigers DTs in this draft class, and he is a bull-strong battler inside. However, he might have to make it as an early-down run-stopper because of his lack of pass-rush juice.
CBS Sports: D+. Classic wide-bodied DT who thrives against the run. Thick frame. Block-shedding skills are well-developed but has no pass-rush plans. Active on passing downs just rarely gets home. Length is a plus and he’s an above-average athlete for a future NT. Not a bad player just limited and this feels early.
ESPN: Jefferson is the third LSU player -- and second on defense -- the Jaguars have drafted so far. It's clear the Jaguars are mining inside linebackers coach Matt House, who spent the past two seasons as LSU's defensive coordinator. The 6-foot-4, 317-pound Jefferson -- who played three seasons at West Virginia before transferring to LSU -- showed off his upper body strength at the combine by benching 225 pounds 34 times. The Jaguars' run defense faded in the second half of the season and played a major role in a season-ending loss to Tennessee -- Derrick Henry ran for a season-high 153 yards -- and the team cut nose tackle Folorunso Fatukasi in March so an upgrade along the interior of the defensive line was a priority in the draft.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: He has suffered from Ailurophobia for as long as he can remember.
Round 5, Pick 153 - Deantre Prince, CB, Mississippi:
NFL: Prince's speed gives him a chance, either as a corner or on special teams, but his lean, shorter frame could be problematic. He was a reliable contributor for the Rebels over the past several seasons.
CBS Sports: B. Outside CB with rockets attached his cleats. Can really run. Route-recognition skills must improve. High-effort type vs. the run but blockers devour him too often. Instinctive in coverage when everything is in front of him. Plays more athletically than his workout. With coaching can be solid pro.
ESPN: The Jaguars continue to add to the secondary with Prince, who lined up almost exclusively outside in college. He had six interceptions and 21 pass breakups in four seasons for the Rebels and one interception in one season at Northeast Mississippi Community College. He worked as a gunner on punt coverage as well, and his best chance to make an impact as a rookie will likely be on special teams.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Won’t eat bugles until after he’s had them on his fingers like claws.
Round 5, Pick 167 - Keilan Robinson, RB, Texas:
NFL: Three straight backs off the board. The Jaguars probably needed more RB depth, and Robinson brings top-shelf speed to Jacksonville. In a crowded Texas backfield, Robinson had to scrap for every offensive touch (156 total in 45 career games) he received. His meal ticket likely will be as a gadget-play specialist or gunner or jammer on special teams.
CBS Sports: C-. Played behind two studs at Texas but made the most of his minimal attempts. Has breakaway speed in a smaller frame. Not a very decisive runner who can win with his vision alone. Not ultra twitchy and elusive. Has some return ability. But this is too early for a developmental type.
ESPN: Robinson started his college career at Alabama and finished at Texans. He ran for 796 yards and eight touchdowns, but he has more value as a kick returner. He averaged 23.6 yards per kickoff return on 39 returns in his career. The Jaguars signed receivereturner Devin Duvernay to replace Jamal Agnew, but the new kickoff rule makes returners more valuable and teams may opt to put two returners on the field at the same time. He also covered kicks at Texas so this is a special teams pick for the Jaguars.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: The only thing worse than being drafted here is having to know TheFencingCoach.
Round 6, Pick 212 - Cam Little, K, Arkansas:
NFL: Our third kicker in a short span here. Little arguably has the best leg talent of the three and can hit all the way out to the 60-plus-yard range. But his inconsistencies (including at the combine) could make him a bit untrustworthy if he struggles in late-game situations.
CBS Sports: B-. Three years of 80-plus percent make rate on field goals in the SEC.
ESPN: Little is the most accurate kicker in Arkansas history, making 82.8% of his attempts (53 of 64) in his three-year career. He also never missed a PAT (129 for 129). He'll be the third kicker on the roster, joining Joey Slye and Riley Patterson, who kicked the game-winning field goal in the Jaguars' 31-30 victory over the Los Angeles Chargers in a wild card playoff game following the 2022 regular season. The Jaguars had agreed to terms with Denver kicker Wil Lutz in free agency but Lutz decided to return to the Broncos, so Little would likely be the favorite to win the competition with Slye and Patterson.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: He is excited to find out where the 36th NFL team is located.
Round 7, Pick 236 - Myles Cole, DE, Texas Tech:
NFL: Finding the right technique for Cole will be key, as he lacks the bulk to handle full-time interior duty, but his unusual traits (especially his length) make him a fun Round 7 dice roll.
CBS Sports: B. Absolutely enormous, freaky long EDGE. Moves well for his size but wasn’t overly productive in college. Has hand work but too often blocks stick to him. Does not deploy his length as an advantage. Has to add that to his arsenal.
ESPN: Cole's measurables at the combine were impressive: 36 7/8-inch arms (longest of any player) and a 7-foot-3 wingspan. He also ran a 4.67-second 40-yard dash, which is impressive for a 6-foot-6, 278-pounder. But his college production wasn't as impressive, with five sacks in six seasons (four years at Louisiana-Monroe and two at Texas Tech). He's a developmental project.
NFL Absolutely Not Fake News: Thinks Sisko was, no IS, the best Trek captain.

I am at a huge low and I need to keep myself from falling again or I'll lose the little momentum I gained, so I want to share my story and hope I can gain some good insight or at least feel good about helping someone else with my story.
Ok, so I'm 36M and have always had hardships, mostly done by my self-sabotage, but sometimes from others too. I am officially diagnosed with generalized depression and anxiety, but in my research and questions to many people I have felt symptoms of far more severe diagnoses, like cPTSD.
Related symptoms include: conflict avoidance, self-hate, paranoia, self-sabotage, prolonged periods of isolation and lack of self-care (weeks sometimes months in between), all or nothing emotions, incompetence, feeling wrong at all times, and so on. I am currently on the waiting list for therapy, but I struggle to keep therapists, like it doesn't feel safe for me to open up to them (not their fault).
I've committed crimes and have been incarcerated multiple times for up to a year, and I know I'm guilty, not anyone else's fault but my own. However, I cannot allow myself forgiveness and instead feel like I should continue to be punished. I've tried time and again to forgive myself, but I still can't.
I've been in serious relationships and gave it my all only for it all to crash and burn in the end. My relationship with my daughter's mother, for example, was one that I should have handled differently although she wasn't healthy for me (she was controlling and ignored my feelings), but I admit I was young, dumb, and still afraid of conflict. I did a lot for my daughter, when I could see her. Her mother has custody and resents me for our failed relationship, so it's been 3 years since I saw my daughter, whom is 9. I have started court cases for her doing that before, but I'm too afraid now because I still feel like I don't deserve to raise my daughter, like I would lead her down a bad path.
So, I've been free since August and trying to get back on my feet. I struggle with social anxiety, so I saught work-from-home jobs, until in February when my sister showed up at my house drunk and broke my PC (lengthy story for that and involves someone else's business too, so not going into it out of respect, but wasn't a fault of mine for once). Since February I've only had my phone, chromecast, and my tv in my room for my isolation.
After enough time my loneliness got too intense, so I would talk to people more again, from online through text. It helped because I was talking to people again, but I was constantly battling myself between bringing them closer and keeping them at a distance. I recently decided to let someone through most of my barriers, and my emotions started going off the wall. I held myself back to the point of a friendship, but I was honest and of course oversharing, so she knew how I thought of her and what I felt about online stuff (online relationships in the past).
So, she's broken through barriers that have stood for 5-10 years untouched and we're talking a lot. I am so exposed with her that I am wanting a whole lot more with her, but she's across the country and I'm jobless at this point, so why talk if I can't take action? Well, she likes someone in her area now and they're hitting it off... and I just got hired today...
Now, I feel like an incompetent NPC who is always just the friend. I am starting to find many reasons why I am a failure and slipping again. I know I shouldn't be feeling any of this and should instead just focus on getting myself back up, but it's so hard. Why do I do this to myself?

So my first job was being a cashier at a grocery store. Since then, I’ve been promoted twice and technically work for a new company now (buyout). So I’ve got about 4 years of management experience.
But a few months into working for the new company, I switched to third shift because I was on the verge of quitting (went through three store managers in a few months).
I decided I didn’t like third shift and newest store manager saw my work ethic and experience and decided he’d rather have me on days anyway.
Problem is that I took a pay cut to go to third shift, and I’m already over the new company’s max pay for my new, slightly lower than before nights, position. I could transfer to a big store and get a little more money, but I’d be giving up my set schedule and flexibility.
I could shoot for an entry level warehouse job, but the reason I like my current job is that I basically run around putting out fires. I don’t think I’d last in a career where I do the same thing over and over, day in and day out. Also I’m afraid of heights.

Hey everyone. Im early 20s. I have prior military aviation experience, Avionics, however it doesn’t transfer to A&p. I’m almost done with my bachelors degree in aviation maintence with a specialization in aviation safety from embry riddle. NO DEBT. I see that there’s some mechanic jobs that don’t require A&p though. What jobs should I apply for?

Hi everyone, I've posted this before on other subs but want to hear more ideas.
I'm a senior year mechanical engineering student at one of the most prestigious universities in my country in Eastern Europe. Actually, I was enrolled in a dual-degree program for physics and mechanical engineering, and I have finished physics with a 3.54/4.00 GPA. I have about a year and a half to finish the ME degree, and my GPA is 3.13 with all of my mechanical engineering related courses having a "barely passing" letter grade (the courses I have transferred from physics are all A/A+). By the time I graduate, my GPA will be around 2.7/4 (which is an average graduation GPA for the ME department in my uni).
Additionally, I am already working at a company 4 hours away from my uni as an R&D researcher with my physics degree, thus cannot really focus on my studies, hence, the bad grades.
I recently started considering applying to a Master's program in Physics in Germany at TUM, LMU, etc. I will (eventually) move to the US as my fiancée is from there, and knowing that the ranking and the brand of your university matters much more in the US, I want to have my Master's degree from a reputable institution as well. I don't really think I can be admitted to a "high-ranking" university in Europe with my ME transcript. Thus, it sort of makes sense for me to pursue a career in Physics. I would like to hear your ideas on whether if it is worth finishing the ME degree? I can also consider quitting my job to focus on my studies, but I am already 23 years old and not sure if that would affect my admission to good universities.
Lastly, I should mention that I am very much interested in all parts of physics and mechanical engineering and cannot really choose. I currently work in the optics industry while having a great interest in robotics and automation.

54 yo single male here, and I've been investing with Vanguard for almost 25 years. When I first started with them, I was a little leary about an investing institution without a brick and mortar, but it's served me well over the years, and anyone I've ever spoken with over the phone was very professional and helpful (except for one instance).
However, I'm planning to retire in the next 6-8 years and while I've been great at investing, I have zero knowledge or education on my needs once it's time to start withdrawing and paying myself. Whenever I go to the Vanguard website, there are always pop-ups about getting an advisor, but I'm not sure this is something I want to do over the phone. I'm too old to start transferring my assets to Fidelity, and besides, I find them comparable in investing style, expertise and investing products (with the exception of Fidelity actually having physical locations).
There's also these other layers that I don't know how to factor into my retirement: my pension, social security, Medicare, and just overall general healthcare. Should I get long term care insurance?
A little background: I have a civil service job and started very late, so my healthcare won't be covered when I retire - as opposed to some other coworkers who have vested 15 years or more, so they get a percentage of healthcare coverage after they retire. All of this is starting to get overwhelming and though I still have time to sort it out, I know that something like this is so daunting, I'll put it off to the end when it's too late.
Where do I begin? I've crossed off moving to Fidelity. My investments have been growing steadily at Vanguard. Starting over again at a new institution doesn't make sense. Has anyone had any experience with a Vanguard advisor?
Also note: I know some folks will advise me to work longer so I can take advantage of my healthcare coverage, but I want to enjoy my life while I still have my health, hence my 6-8 year working horizon. Thank you.

I wasn't sure how to title this query, so I'm hoping that even if it's confusing that will grab some attention.
I have £6500 in debt. £1500 is my overdraft and the following £5000 is my credit card. They are both 0% interest until August 2024 and Feb 2025 respectively.
I've recently learned that I will be receiving £6500 as a lump sum from PIP backpayment. I'm disabled, it was wrongly stopped Dec 2022, went to tribunal last week and they ruled in my favour. (NB not having PIP is what built 80-90% of my debt. Now that I will have it back there's little to no concern about re-accruing debt to this level).
Because this small (but significant) 'windfall' was unexpected, I had been budgeting and planning how to pay off both debts, not confident I would make it before interest started. I live paycheck to paycheck as I currently have no emergency fund (hence the overdraft and credit card).
Here was my current thoughts:

• Rather than immediately use the £6500 to clear the debts, act like it doesn't exist, continue my budgeting and payment plans. This will prevent me from getting comfortable and inevitably accruing more debt; I know myself enough to know the risk of having a 0 balance would make me likely to start utilising that credit again during the 0% periods and convincing myself 'it's fine, I'll be able to pay it off in time'.
  
• Have some of the cash easily accessible and the other invested: As my OD needs to be gone by Nov, I wanted to keep £1500 in an easily accessible account. That way when deadline day rolls around (or just before) and if I haven't cleared my OD I'll have the full amount ready to go, even if I don't need it.
  
• As my CC deadline is later I thought about investing it in my S&S ISA which has historical performed quite well (68.74% time weighted returns) in the hopes of growing it even a little over the 8 months. See what progress I make paying off the debt, and again if the deadline roles around I'll have the money to cover it. I know the 'cons' having used this method before- that my money won't be immediately accessible, comparatively arduous having to sell investments individually to have the cash available to transfer, and of course that it runs the risk of dropping in value and not being as much as what.
  

I've had a look at the flowchart and it says to focus on building an emergency fund first before tackling debt, but I really want to have these gone before they start accruing interest. Should I stick to this plan or factor in some emergency fund budgeting? I'm picturing my debts being significantly lower by the time I have to utilise the savings/investments, so whatever is left over can be for emergencies
Noteworthy info: - My accounts: Easy Access Pot (4.53% APR) with Monzo, 32 Day notice account (4.66% APR) with Investec, S&S ISA with Moneybox (current value £995) as well as my Halifax current account & Moneybox Lifetime ISA (£560) - Open to new accounts, have been looking around and Santander have a 5% APR savings account which I'm considering. - Trying to simplify things as much as possible. I know I could be shopping about for best interest rates and moving money around but I just want to 'set and forget' this money until I need to utilise it, and crack on with working. I'd prefer not to deal with accounts that have minimum amount requirements and withdrawal limits etc. -I'm not a big earner per say and right now I'm looking for a new job to maximise income but got limitations being disabled but also a carer for my parents (the irony isn't lost on me). -Now that my PIP has been reinstated I won't be building more debt. Arguably I could be better off month to month because it helps pay for my treatments, which make me better able to work, be productive etc. I think due to inflation I'll be getting a few quid more week/month than I did before it was stopped. I might squirrel that extra £10-20 away each time because I didn't have it before so again pretending like I don't have it now will help me stick to my budgeting.
My two biggest goals this year are getting out of debt and tackling my health issues. This opportunity can genuinely change the trajectory of my future with a compounding effective on my finances. I'm new to my personal finance journey and a fair few years behind my peers: almost 30 and nowhere near ready to buy a house, start a family, go traveling etc but I want to make the best of this and turn my prospects around.
Any information/advice/moral support from the community and those better versed in personal finance than me would be much appreciated. Thank you.
TLDR: Do I pay off debt immediately, or try to grow this money until I need it? Should I factor in an emergency fund or focus on debt repayment?

I took and passed the UBE in oregon in february of this year. I ultimately want to practice in seattle. I currently live in california.
I don’t have a job in oregon. I haven’t started applying to jobs yet, but I will soon. I am focusing my (online) job search in seattle.
my career counselor from my law school suggested that I do not apply to the washington state bar until I have a job offer in hand.
I now have to decide if I want to join the oregon state bar. Is there any benefit to doing this if I don’t have a job or plan to practice in oregon? would applying to the washington state bar be significantly easier as an attorney, as opposed to a UBE score transfer? does anyone have any experience with a situation like this?
I plan on staying at my current law clerk job in california until I have a concrete offer in hand for an attorney position elsewhere. the reason I took the oregon bar is because washington’s registration deadline had already passed by the time california’s results came out.
BIG EDIT:
I now recognize that the advice to not apply to washington until I have a job offer was stupid. I will disregard.
I just got through to the washington state bar admissions helpline. they were very helpful. he suggested that I apply to the washington bar before I swear in for oregon, because that will mean my application is general, not an attorney application, and thus will cost less and be quicker. If I decide to swear in to oregon for whatever reason (expanding my job search, etc) then I will just need to update the washington bar association. it won’t change my application type.
I’m going to spend $585 applying to the washington state bar as soon as I get my paycheck in two days.
thank you everyone for the help/comments! so glad I got more qualified opinions and didn’t just rely on my career counselor.

hi everyone I’m a recent transfer and got into cal and ucsd for public health, waitlisted at ucla 😔💔! i am extremely grateful, however am not sure which I should pick. i’ve always imagined myself in socal but didn’t expect to get into berkeley. don’t want to regret letting go of an opportunity like this. both schools are extremely strong for my major so I’d love to hear your input!
Cal: Public Health B.A. major
Pros: - cheaper than UCSD by 5-7k - name and prestige - Global Poverty Practice (GPP) minor ^ can relate my own practice tailored to public health - 4+1 program (able to get masters in 1 year after undergrad, if i get accepted) - location! also has a joint program w UCSF - connections (great for networking and have multiple doctors I can shadow and gain experience from) - a lot of public health grads are able to land a job before they graduate - has a children’s hospital nearby (want to do pediatrics in the future) - research is great - feel like this school would rlly challenge me and make me grow - more premeds get into medical school - “feeder” school for UCSF, most students also go to UCLA for med Cons: - gloomy weather bc of bay - close to home - grade deflation - worried I won’t have a high enough GPA to apply to med school - no med school on campus - academic environment - housing prices are expensive 😭 - safety (as a girl) - anchor housing is 2k with no meal plan (i think) - i’m taking a summer class which is on quarter system and cal starts on a semester system
UCSD: Public Health with Concentration in Medicine Science
Pros: - la jolla! great location and would feel relaxed going to the school - nicer weather - 3 hospitals on campus and many other facilities - easier on GPA - amazing for premeds - tution is expensive - far from home - people are more friendly - safer than cal ? - research is great - feeder school for ucsd med ?
Cons: - ucsd use to be my dream school but it changed to ucla - not really sure if i’ll feel challenged enough to grow academically - housing crisis? - not too sure if sd is my vibe - heard it’s socially dead - heard their public health program is less premed and more health

So I am a CA ARTICLE at this small firm in my city. I took transfer to here from a renowned CA firm just because it allows for CA INDUSTRIAL TRAINING and the other didn't.
Now I honestly hate my firm, there's too much micro-management , plus very high load of work plus I do literally labour like getting photocopies from shops and getting tea for sir. I am single article here other articles either left or went for study leave.
My final option seems to be industrial training which I might or might not get as I am from small firm.
My other option is to bear this articleship for another 6 months and then go for dummy articleship.
Does this seem as a good option to go for dummy after a year.
PS: DOING CA CAUSE OF PARENTAL PRESSURE THAT'S WHY DIDN'T WENT TO BiG FIRMS CAUSE I DON'T HAVE MUCH INTEREST. WANT TO DO GOVERNMENT JOB AFTER CA.....
PLEASE GUIDE ME AND ANY ONE WHO'S DOING CA INDUSTRIAL TRAINING PLEASE LEAVE SOME INSIGHT.
THANK YOU.

hi everyone I’m a recent transfer and got into cal and ucsd for public health, waitlisted at ucla 😔💔! i am extremely grateful, however am not sure which I should pick. i’ve always imagined myself in socal but didn’t expect to get into berkeley. don’t want to regret letting go of an opportunity like this. both schools are extremely strong for my major so I’d love to hear your input!
Cal: Public Health B.A. major
Pros: - cheaper than UCSD by 5-7k - name and prestige - Global Poverty Practice (GPP) minor ^ can relate my own practice tailored to public health - 4+1 program (able to get masters in 1 year after undergrad, if i get accepted) - location! also has a joint program w UCSF - connections (great for networking and have multiple doctors I can shadow and gain experience from) - a lot of public health grads are able to land a job before they graduate - has a children’s hospital nearby (want to do pediatrics in the future) - research is great - feel like this school would rlly challenge me and make me grow
Cons: - gloomy weather bc of bay - close to home - grade deflation - worried I won’t have a high enough GPA to apply to med school - no med school on campus - academic environment - housing prices are expensive 😭 - safety (as a girl) - anchor housing is 2k with no meal plan (i think) - i’m taking a summer class which is on quarter system and cal starts on a semester system - more premeds get into medical school - “feeder” for UCSF, most students also go to UCLA med
UCSD: Public Health with Concentration in Medicine Science
Pros: - la jolla! great location and would feel relaxed going to the school - nicer weather - 3 hospitals on campus and many other facilities - easier on GPA - amazing for premeds - tution is expensive - far from home - people are more friendly - safer than cal ? - research is great - feeder school for ucsd med ?
Cons: - ucsd use to be my dream school but it changed to ucla - not really sure if i’ll feel challenged enough to grow academically - housing crisis? - not too sure if sd is my vibe - heard it’s harder to have a social life - heard their public health program is less premed and more health - dining hall food is bad, not too sure about places around ucsd