Student loans there's nothing to repossess. That made declaring bankruptcy in the past a very tempting position.(Get your degree, declare bankruptcy and they can't take the education out of your head.) Actually I remember hearing a story somewhere that triggered this change to make the secured was actually from a med student. They completed medical school and were starting residency. They did the math and saw if they declared bankruptcy that right as they finished their residency (where they'd finally start making the big bucks) the bankruptcy would be so old to not affect them financially. So since they didn't have a ton of money they figured, hey it's in my financial best interest to just declare bankruptcy since I have so little now creditors aren't going to get anything anyway.
Ok, here's a repost since it seems my previous one got eaten but anyway this is going to be a rant
So first of all how often do you even get told why they didn't hire you after the interview. Pretty much never. If you're lucky they'll tell you that you weren't the right fit. However most likely they'll either tell you nothing or bald faced lie to you. (Yes, I'm sure you didn't hire me because you found the absolute perfect candidate, that's why you reposted the exact same job with the exact same job number 2 days later.) I get that they might not want to tell me for legal reasons but just making up excuses why they didn't hire me is just horseshit.
Then of course unprofessionalism on the actual interview itself. I've had interviewers be late(20+ minutes) when I'd show up or they even had to run around to find someone to do the interview. Hey here's a good one, I did a lunch interview with someone that didn't get you can't talk and eat at the same time. Of course she tried her damnedest to do just that. The food would constantly fall out of her mouth on to her plate because she wouldn't stop talking and then, I shit you not, she would scoop back up into her mouth.(Completely nauseating) At the end she literally licked her hand from wrist to finger tip.(I wish I was making that one up.)
Of course beyond that there are the games revolving around the interview. Sometimes they'll suddenly remember that they need you to do another interview or a Skype call. Really this is them wanting you to go away but for some stupid reason they just don't want to say not interested so they try to exhaust you. Or how about them asking you to do some version of FizzBuzz during a phone screen and of course you find out how few actually know the point of that test so they screw it up.(I wonder how many of them even know what the test is called.)
Of course I shouldn't forget fake jobs. The ones where they already know whom they're going to hire and it's a formality but there's some rule that says they have to post it. Of course they have to bring in a few people to make it look good but they're just wasting people's time since only their intended candidate is getting that job.
Last but not least is just generally screw ups during application process. Things like doing the initial phone screen twice because they forgot they had already done it and then trying to set up the tech screen on a holiday.(I kept asking her, are you sure she can do it then? Monday is a holiday. She set up the phone screen and got back to me a few days later saying that the tech manager can't do it that day.) Or how about asking if you can come in the day after tomorrow for an on site after telling them repeatedly I need a week since I'm currently working and have to ask for a day off to do an interview?(Which is apparently very hard for them to understand.)
Suffice it to say, if you act like spoiled 5 year old expect the same behavior in kind when the tables have turned.
I'm guessing what they're talking about is the job is real, however the position is effectively already filled. They wrote up the job with a specific person in mind for it but due to various policies they're required to post the job. The chance of anyone applying for it and actually getting it instead of the person they want are effectively 0.
IE it sounds great in theory but when it comes time to implement it they NEVER implement it correctly.(Which is pretty much what gets said of communism.) Of course I find it telling that one of the big proponents has a communist sounding moniker of "Uncle Bob".
What he actually got in trouble was publishing in Italian instead of Latin where he basically made a comment that was taken to be opposition to the Christian theory of the omnipotence of god. I guess I could also point out that the reason this came up was because everybody at the time was seeing that Ptolomic doesn't work but there were 2 theories, tychonic and Copernican that both work because they're mechanically equivalent. I could also point out one of the reasons the G man published in the first place was his old college buddy, the pope, asked him to. Yeah, really.
I was watching a video where one of the guys who came up with it mention the alternative name that one of the other guys really liked. He wanted to call it conversational development. That is so much better of a name for what you're trying to do. Everything is supposed to be a conversation. A conversation is a 2 way street which is the entire fucking point. There isn't supposed to be a deal where say a project manager dictates what he wants and the devs have no say, just do it bitches. You're not supposed to have dev dump a release to QA, deal with it bitches. Hell, you're supposed to have conversation between junior and senior developers to turn the juniors into seniors. I get they called it agile to sell it to corporate but the problem is that by doing it they convinced corporate agile is just "Go fast be stupid"
The best test of whether you understand something is how well you can teach someone else.
Damn by that standard a lot of my professors in various course work from CS to philosophy didn't understand their subject, even the ones that were world renowned experts in their field.
Mostly because it was so slow I barely got through the monkey scene. After that I figured I'd be better off reading the book. Hey on the bright side it was great when I got to explain to someone who watched the movie but hadn't read the book what the plot actually was supposed to be about and what was happening in the movie.
"argues that software emulation is inherently less accurate than re-creating systems at the hardware level,"
I don't know if I'd believe this. I mean the Genesis is kind of infamous that different versions of the physical hardware from Sega don't get the sound right on the newer revs of that systems so I'm not going to assume a hardware implementation is going to have an advantage over a software solution.
Oh wait, they think innovation is following the latest fad that they think is new. (Literally I had someone that thinks he's the shit show me lambda expressions and thought I would be blown away. Yeah, saw that 30 years ago in LISP.)
Just to expand on this we literally had games for the 2600 based on the Chuckwagon from a dog food commercial. (Admittedly there's some pretty bad shit for the NES like Predator.)
I'll concede that Nintendo may have targeted boys specifically. I have no recollection of such a campaign, but I was very young at the time so I may simply not have noticed it. But the idea that they HAD to do so due to some quirk in how toys are marketed is complete nonsense. Moreover, those of us who went to purchase a Nintendo system knew exactly what we were getting: a video game conaole. I didn't beg my parents to buy me a "boys toy"; I wanted a fucking video game system, and that's how I got my first NES.
Well I can check the back of my NES control deck box which shows Mom, Dad and Son. Actually to be blunt as someone that was a gamer starting with the 2600 video games were for "boys". (If you ever went to the arcade in the early 80's this was pretty obvious.) On the other hand back then it seemed like every company was more than happy if their hit appealed to everybody, like Pac-Man, Tetris, and Super Mario Bros.
You'll pretty much have to stop your car in the middle of the street, turn it off and then start it up again to get the badly programmed ad to go away.
Which were originally developed to treat high blood pressure and prostate enlargement. (They got used for other things when some of the side effects were noticed.)
The reason is actually simple, you have no idea how long the guy in front of you is going to take before he notices the light changed. I've easily seen it take 10+ seconds for the guy to notice. Hell, sometimes they take so long that only their car can get through.
If by "I can't write an answer" you mean one that has no syntax errors at all, with absolutely no bugs of any kind, that is the specific answer the interviewer was looking for, and in some arbitrary time frame which he or she has made up then guilty as charged. What you're supposed to do is give the test to a couple of co-workers that you know can code to see their results as a baseline. You know so you can see how often they make syntax errors and logic bugs and also how long it really takes someone to solve your particular issue. They have a word for this in science, it's called a control and you could compare an interviewee with a control sample. Of course if you actually use fizzbuzz correctly to just check to see if the person can code at all, IE can work toward an answer, understands what a function is, conditionals, for loops, etc then I'd pass that test.
Basically a way to gauge applicants without the biases of the interviewer and give everyone a fair chance regardless of anything. However I then remember how often I've seen them screw up something simple and straightforward like variations of the fizz-buzz test that I figure it's not damn likely they'll use this remotely correctly. (But hey, I'm cynical)
Pretty much fixing bugs and working under other engineers who are in charge of the actually projects is considered low prestige. Admittedly it's expect you do this early in your career to get some experience. However if for any reason you get stuck doing this for any length of time once you have experience or find yourself transitioned to this role it becomes harder and harder to get out of that role and staying here will stall your career. Ways you can definitely tell you're basically consider a grunt and not to be trusted with anything include never being invited to any meetings, never being in charge of a new product, and never being asked your opinion by management or if you give it you're just ignored or talked over. If you find this happening to you the best bet is to just find another job where you won't be typecast.
I know in my worthless opinion that if I have to choose between getting pointers right in C++ or LISP's handling of parens where literally having too many or too few causes your app to crash then damn it, I'm going with the pointers.
Slashdot Mirror
So just to expand what you said, yes it happens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Student loans there's nothing to repossess. That made declaring bankruptcy in the past a very tempting position.(Get your degree, declare bankruptcy and they can't take the education out of your head.) Actually I remember hearing a story somewhere that triggered this change to make the secured was actually from a med student. They completed medical school and were starting residency. They did the math and saw if they declared bankruptcy that right as they finished their residency (where they'd finally start making the big bucks) the bankruptcy would be so old to not affect them financially. So since they didn't have a ton of money they figured, hey it's in my financial best interest to just declare bankruptcy since I have so little now creditors aren't going to get anything anyway.
So first of all how often do you even get told why they didn't hire you after the interview. Pretty much never. If you're lucky they'll tell you that you weren't the right fit. However most likely they'll either tell you nothing or bald faced lie to you. (Yes, I'm sure you didn't hire me because you found the absolute perfect candidate, that's why you reposted the exact same job with the exact same job number 2 days later.) I get that they might not want to tell me for legal reasons but just making up excuses why they didn't hire me is just horseshit.
Then of course unprofessionalism on the actual interview itself. I've had interviewers be late(20+ minutes) when I'd show up or they even had to run around to find someone to do the interview. Hey here's a good one, I did a lunch interview with someone that didn't get you can't talk and eat at the same time. Of course she tried her damnedest to do just that. The food would constantly fall out of her mouth on to her plate because she wouldn't stop talking and then, I shit you not, she would scoop back up into her mouth.(Completely nauseating) At the end she literally licked her hand from wrist to finger tip.(I wish I was making that one up.)
Of course beyond that there are the games revolving around the interview. Sometimes they'll suddenly remember that they need you to do another interview or a Skype call. Really this is them wanting you to go away but for some stupid reason they just don't want to say not interested so they try to exhaust you. Or how about them asking you to do some version of FizzBuzz during a phone screen and of course you find out how few actually know the point of that test so they screw it up.(I wonder how many of them even know what the test is called.)
Of course I shouldn't forget fake jobs. The ones where they already know whom they're going to hire and it's a formality but there's some rule that says they have to post it. Of course they have to bring in a few people to make it look good but they're just wasting people's time since only their intended candidate is getting that job.
Last but not least is just generally screw ups during application process. Things like doing the initial phone screen twice because they forgot they had already done it and then trying to set up the tech screen on a holiday.(I kept asking her, are you sure she can do it then? Monday is a holiday. She set up the phone screen and got back to me a few days later saying that the tech manager can't do it that day.) Or how about asking if you can come in the day after tomorrow for an on site after telling them repeatedly I need a week since I'm currently working and have to ask for a day off to do an interview?(Which is apparently very hard for them to understand.)
Suffice it to say, if you act like spoiled 5 year old expect the same behavior in kind when the tables have turned.
I'm guessing what they're talking about is the job is real, however the position is effectively already filled. They wrote up the job with a specific person in mind for it but due to various policies they're required to post the job. The chance of anyone applying for it and actually getting it instead of the person they want are effectively 0.
IE it sounds great in theory but when it comes time to implement it they NEVER implement it correctly.(Which is pretty much what gets said of communism.) Of course I find it telling that one of the big proponents has a communist sounding moniker of "Uncle Bob".
One evil empire just pulled ahead of another evil empire.
What he actually got in trouble was publishing in Italian instead of Latin where he basically made a comment that was taken to be opposition to the Christian theory of the omnipotence of god. I guess I could also point out that the reason this came up was because everybody at the time was seeing that Ptolomic doesn't work but there were 2 theories, tychonic and Copernican that both work because they're mechanically equivalent. I could also point out one of the reasons the G man published in the first place was his old college buddy, the pope, asked him to. Yeah, really.
I was watching a video where one of the guys who came up with it mention the alternative name that one of the other guys really liked. He wanted to call it conversational development. That is so much better of a name for what you're trying to do. Everything is supposed to be a conversation. A conversation is a 2 way street which is the entire fucking point. There isn't supposed to be a deal where say a project manager dictates what he wants and the devs have no say, just do it bitches. You're not supposed to have dev dump a release to QA, deal with it bitches. Hell, you're supposed to have conversation between junior and senior developers to turn the juniors into seniors. I get they called it agile to sell it to corporate but the problem is that by doing it they convinced corporate agile is just "Go fast be stupid"
The best test of whether you understand something is how well you can teach someone else.
Damn by that standard a lot of my professors in various course work from CS to philosophy didn't understand their subject, even the ones that were world renowned experts in their field.
Mostly because it was so slow I barely got through the monkey scene. After that I figured I'd be better off reading the book. Hey on the bright side it was great when I got to explain to someone who watched the movie but hadn't read the book what the plot actually was supposed to be about and what was happening in the movie.
"argues that software emulation is inherently less accurate than re-creating systems at the hardware level,"
I don't know if I'd believe this. I mean the Genesis is kind of infamous that different versions of the physical hardware from Sega don't get the sound right on the newer revs of that systems so I'm not going to assume a hardware implementation is going to have an advantage over a software solution.
-----
Popular as in used because it's the only option, not because people want to use it over pretty much anything else.
Oh wait, they think innovation is following the latest fad that they think is new. (Literally I had someone that thinks he's the shit show me lambda expressions and thought I would be blown away. Yeah, saw that 30 years ago in LISP.)
It's got to be V'Ger
he regrets that people realized it was a politically motivated event. ---------------- FTFY
Just to expand on this we literally had games for the 2600 based on the Chuckwagon from a dog food commercial. (Admittedly there's some pretty bad shit for the NES like Predator.)
I'll concede that Nintendo may have targeted boys specifically. I have no recollection of such a campaign, but I was very young at the time so I may simply not have noticed it. But the idea that they HAD to do so due to some quirk in how toys are marketed is complete nonsense. Moreover, those of us who went to purchase a Nintendo system knew exactly what we were getting: a video game conaole. I didn't beg my parents to buy me a "boys toy"; I wanted a fucking video game system, and that's how I got my first NES.
Well I can check the back of my NES control deck box which shows Mom, Dad and Son. Actually to be blunt as someone that was a gamer starting with the 2600 video games were for "boys". (If you ever went to the arcade in the early 80's this was pretty obvious.) On the other hand back then it seemed like every company was more than happy if their hit appealed to everybody, like Pac-Man, Tetris, and Super Mario Bros.
You'll pretty much have to stop your car in the middle of the street, turn it off and then start it up again to get the badly programmed ad to go away.
Which were originally developed to treat high blood pressure and prostate enlargement. (They got used for other things when some of the side effects were noticed.)
The reason is actually simple, you have no idea how long the guy in front of you is going to take before he notices the light changed. I've easily seen it take 10+ seconds for the guy to notice. Hell, sometimes they take so long that only their car can get through.
If by "I can't write an answer" you mean one that has no syntax errors at all, with absolutely no bugs of any kind, that is the specific answer the interviewer was looking for, and in some arbitrary time frame which he or she has made up then guilty as charged. What you're supposed to do is give the test to a couple of co-workers that you know can code to see their results as a baseline. You know so you can see how often they make syntax errors and logic bugs and also how long it really takes someone to solve your particular issue. They have a word for this in science, it's called a control and you could compare an interviewee with a control sample. Of course if you actually use fizzbuzz correctly to just check to see if the person can code at all, IE can work toward an answer, understands what a function is, conditionals, for loops, etc then I'd pass that test.
Basically a way to gauge applicants without the biases of the interviewer and give everyone a fair chance regardless of anything. However I then remember how often I've seen them screw up something simple and straightforward like variations of the fizz-buzz test that I figure it's not damn likely they'll use this remotely correctly. (But hey, I'm cynical)
Pretty much fixing bugs and working under other engineers who are in charge of the actually projects is considered low prestige. Admittedly it's expect you do this early in your career to get some experience. However if for any reason you get stuck doing this for any length of time once you have experience or find yourself transitioned to this role it becomes harder and harder to get out of that role and staying here will stall your career. Ways you can definitely tell you're basically consider a grunt and not to be trusted with anything include never being invited to any meetings, never being in charge of a new product, and never being asked your opinion by management or if you give it you're just ignored or talked over. If you find this happening to you the best bet is to just find another job where you won't be typecast.
I know in my worthless opinion that if I have to choose between getting pointers right in C++ or LISP's handling of parens where literally having too many or too few causes your app to crash then damn it, I'm going with the pointers.
I figure it's only a matter of time before one of them tells us the Elon also created the Universe 13.7 billion years ago.