I've always found that the best approach to job seeking is to reach the company before it sends out the online job offer. I think it works to identify the companies that are likely and attractive employers and probe for job opportunities.
The anecdote about 29000 applicants being rejected leaving none qualified raises two thoughts.
First, the programmers for the intelligent sorting system should be fired (thus opening up additional positions to be filled).
Second, that employer requirements are too high for the compensation offered. Imagine meeting all of the requirements stated in the want-ad, only to discover that the compensation they wish to give for the perfect applicant isn't fair. It may be competitive, but not adequate for meeting all those requirements.
Online recruiting and online resume submissions have been a mainstay of job searches for more than a decade so I'm not convinced that's the real deterrent from nailing a good job. Moreover, those completely automated HR systems are more the domain of the largest companies (think IBM, HP, Lockheed Martin), not what smaller and mid-sized companies rely on to find their best applicants. That said, I would agree that persistence, the art of picking up the phone, or sending a direct email to the person, not the inbox, that helps in the selection process might be a lost art today. Engineer applicants need to find any way they can to stand out today and that definitely involves cirvumventing the automated system to deliver that personal touch.
In a bid to boost the viability of lithium-based electric car batteries, a team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has developed a chemistry that could possibly double an EV’s driving range while cutting its battery cost in half.
Using Siemens NX software, a team of engineering students from the University of Michigan built an electric vehicle and raced in the 2013 Bridgestone World Solar Challenge. One of those students blogged for Design News throughout the race.
Robots that walk have come a long way from simple barebones walking machines or pairs of legs without an upper body and head. Much of the research these days focuses on making more humanoid robots. But they are not all created equal.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.