The functional languages are often about 2 decades ahead of the imperative languages in terms of features and ideas. Truly powerful type systems, purity, laziness, infinite data structures. They really do change the way you think about design. Engines (controllers for MVC) are excellent in those languages. They are also very good for protyping non-vonNeumann architectures (like Hadoop code) unlike the Algol based languages.
They have their own problems like a tendency for slightly less than optimal algorithms to be quadratic in memory.
For almost 30 years we have had chess computers competitive with the best human players in the world. None of them understands they are playing chess. None of them understands why they are doing what they are doing.
Many of the systems that large number of human lives already depend on require machines to make correct choices. Including your car which at this point has dozens of systems none of which "understands what is doing and why" that are making adjustments to the instructions you are sending via. the wheel and the pedal based on information you aren't getting like road traction.
We aren't talking size of the total database, we are talking size of the dataset that needs to be manipulated for the query. You can't tune Oracle for Hadoop levels of parallelism.
You have a business problem which is completely unrealistic to solve via. vertical scaling on SQL Things in the range of 50-200k CPU hours Hadoop is good for. SQL solutions are pretty dreadful at 1000 CPU hours type workloads. BTW petabytes and exabytes. SQL is pretty good for terabytes.
-- IPv6 is very nice. It really is a shame there's so much inertia.
Agreed. When Obama first came in (2009) the government was pushing hard. That was something that could have happened with executive power only. Its a pity that by 2011 the initiative had mostly died.
The internet won't be ipv6 only it will be ipv6 primarily. I think it would be very very fast. Consider the basic home user getting a/60, that is 16 home subnets each larger than today's internet to allocate addresses from. Devices themselves can default to an address (their subnet + mac), random or the home user (including things like the home router) can provision them out manually.
devices with an Ipv4 dynamic address using NAT would still exist but the permanent address comes almost immediately after the ISP makes ipv6 available to the home.
Sure. If the USA decides a particular corporate activity is in the national interest then the CIA can freely back it. We had a lot more crony capitalism 1930s-1970s and it showed across all areas of government, including the first 3 decades of the CIA. My point is that this is not a blanket guarantee. They can also act against corporate interests freely when they deem it appropriate.
Determining resolution of sources and methods is the job of the Senate and House intelligence committees. If they wanted the CIA to be in the vulnerability patching business they would have instructed them to do so.
The FBI (and more the department of commerce) not the CIA is responsible for protecting corporate interests. The CIA can freely endanger American corporate interests.
The reason to develop for them is that Apple has a huge share of the 400m consumers who spend the most on applications.
As an aside, vertical applications don't have this problem. They aren't easy to clone as the developer often has to have business partnership relations with desktop / server / SaaS companies. You often don't have to give up a percentage as the app is included (free).
That a radius is 1/2 a circumference and you can move the 2. And yes people miss those sorts of things all the time in interviews. I was also thinking about derivation formulas 4*(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7...)
As for why transcendental matters mainly I was trying to pick something that's only doable with fairly advanced knowledge. Basically this tests the person understands graduate level Galois theory.
AWS is just a bucket for storing my website assets over the Internet.
No it vastly more than just a big hard drive. There are 3 main computational theory about parallelism and AWS introduces specific complexities. This is not an easy topic.
I don't use sort algorithms for 99% of the code I write at work (IT stuff) and home (web development). I know how to implement binary and bubble sorts. If those don't do the job, I'll look for something else in the "Mastering Algorithms with C" book.;)
The point isn't if you can read the book. The point is how much you already know. I can read French with a dictionary I can read English without one.
The companies have to respond to what you aren't testing. Project based testing does a good job of testing things like collaboration skills and research skills that individual tests don't. Individual testing with no access to outside information tests depth of knowledge on hand.
Of course. But do you know which sort algorithms are required when? What the tradeoffs are? Since we are talking AWS how various algorithms decompose with out of order execution or on various configurations of network speed, disk speed and memory? Etc..
You can look all that up. But if you need to look it up then you don't know algorithm theory.
If I'm hiring someone to program mathematical algorithms I'd want them to be able to prove the circumference of a circle is 2*pi*r because that means they understand what pi is. I would want them to be able to give several derivations of pi, and if the job were hard enough how to prove pi is transcendental.
They were testing your computer science knowledge. Its not that they wanted you to write specific algorithms but they want you to know those specific algorithms and the differences between them.
1) Questions to determine depth in fields of expertise. 2) White board. Can the developer think algorithmically?How knowledgeable are they about computer science? And finally how fast are they.
Does a good job of getting the developers I want. Everyone can google.
I've noticed a lot of people saying they want a security feature for their phones. This is actually quite easy. There are per user MDM services. They have many of the non discovery features people above are asking for. For example a destruction of the encryption on device in case of physical tampering with it being stored in the cloud. Security is available at about $50-100 / device / yr.
Slashdot Mirror
The functional languages are often about 2 decades ahead of the imperative languages in terms of features and ideas. Truly powerful type systems, purity, laziness, infinite data structures. They really do change the way you think about design. Engines (controllers for MVC) are excellent in those languages. They are also very good for protyping non-vonNeumann architectures (like Hadoop code) unlike the Algol based languages.
They have their own problems like a tendency for slightly less than optimal algorithms to be quadratic in memory.
What is going on with redundant ratings on every post. This has been happening for months.
For almost 30 years we have had chess computers competitive with the best human players in the world. None of them understands they are playing chess. None of them understands why they are doing what they are doing.
Many of the systems that large number of human lives already depend on require machines to make correct choices. Including your car which at this point has dozens of systems none of which "understands what is doing and why" that are making adjustments to the instructions you are sending via. the wheel and the pedal based on information you aren't getting like road traction.
We aren't talking size of the total database, we are talking size of the dataset that needs to be manipulated for the query. You can't tune Oracle for Hadoop levels of parallelism.
I'd say its really this.
You have a business problem which is completely unrealistic to solve via. vertical scaling on SQL Things in the range of 50-200k CPU hours Hadoop is good for. SQL solutions are pretty dreadful at 1000 CPU hours type workloads. BTW petabytes and exabytes. SQL is pretty good for terabytes.
-- IPv6 is very nice. It really is a shame there's so much inertia.
Agreed. When Obama first came in (2009) the government was pushing hard. That was something that could have happened with executive power only. Its a pity that by 2011 the initiative had mostly died.
The internet won't be ipv6 only it will be ipv6 primarily. I think it would be very very fast. Consider the basic home user getting a /60, that is 16 home subnets each larger than today's internet to allocate addresses from. Devices themselves can default to an address (their subnet + mac), random or the home user (including things like the home router) can provision them out manually.
devices with an Ipv4 dynamic address using NAT would still exist but the permanent address comes almost immediately after the ISP makes ipv6 available to the home.
Sure. If the USA decides a particular corporate activity is in the national interest then the CIA can freely back it. We had a lot more crony capitalism 1930s-1970s and it showed across all areas of government, including the first 3 decades of the CIA. My point is that this is not a blanket guarantee. They can also act against corporate interests freely when they deem it appropriate.
Determining resolution of sources and methods is the job of the Senate and House intelligence committees. If they wanted the CIA to be in the vulnerability patching business they would have instructed them to do so.
The FBI (and more the department of commerce) not the CIA is responsible for protecting corporate interests. The CIA can freely endanger American corporate interests.
National security not personal security. Not the same thing.
Why is that? They aren't a law enforcement agency. There are all sorts of crimes the CIA becomes aware of they are indifferent too.
The reason to develop for them is that Apple has a huge share of the 400m consumers who spend the most on applications.
As an aside, vertical applications don't have this problem. They aren't easy to clone as the developer often has to have business partnership relations with desktop / server / SaaS companies. You often don't have to give up a percentage as the app is included (free).
That a radius is 1/2 a circumference and you can move the 2. And yes people miss those sorts of things all the time in interviews. I was also thinking about derivation formulas 4*(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7...)
As for why transcendental matters mainly I was trying to pick something that's only doable with fairly advanced knowledge. Basically this tests the person understands graduate level Galois theory.
No it vastly more than just a big hard drive. There are 3 main computational theory about parallelism and AWS introduces specific complexities. This is not an easy topic.
The point isn't if you can read the book. The point is how much you already know. I can read French with a dictionary I can read English without one.
That sounds like a bad interviewer and a good question. Google is going to be imperfect in their staffing that doesn't mean it is a bad place to work.
The companies have to respond to what you aren't testing. Project based testing does a good job of testing things like collaboration skills and research skills that individual tests don't. Individual testing with no access to outside information tests depth of knowledge on hand.
Of course. But do you know which sort algorithms are required when? What the tradeoffs are? Since we are talking AWS how various algorithms decompose with out of order execution or on various configurations of network speed, disk speed and memory? Etc..
You can look all that up. But if you need to look it up then you don't know algorithm theory.
If I'm hiring someone to program mathematical algorithms I'd want them to be able to prove the circumference of a circle is 2*pi*r because that means they understand what pi is. I would want them to be able to give several derivations of pi, and if the job were hard enough how to prove pi is transcendental.
They were testing your computer science knowledge. Its not that they wanted you to write specific algorithms but they want you to know those specific algorithms and the differences between them.
Sorry but if you don't know algorithm theory you don't know how to evaluate the code you are writing.
Yep same page. I hire much the same way.
1) Questions to determine depth in fields of expertise.
2) White board. Can the developer think algorithmically?How knowledgeable are they about computer science? And finally how fast are they.
Does a good job of getting the developers I want. Everyone can google.
An can have an application blow the fuse.
I've noticed a lot of people saying they want a security feature for their phones. This is actually quite easy. There are per user MDM services. They have many of the non discovery features people above are asking for. For example a destruction of the encryption on device in case of physical tampering with it being stored in the cloud. Security is available at about $50-100 / device / yr.
Samsung Knox does what the parent wants. If the device gets compromised the Knox subsystem will blow a physical fuse and destroy the data permanently.