Firefox is open source, and daily builds are available. Linux is open source, and daily builds are available. MySQL is open source, and daily builds are available. Apache is open source, and daily builds are available.
All are large, complex programs and platforms, with reputations to maintain and uphold.
Android is "open source" and... Google will release code when they're good and ready.
Further, 3.0 has shipped. 3.1 has shipped. And yet, Google will not release the source code for the current, shipping version, until the NEXT version is available and ships.
Seems to me that they're getting an awful lot of mileage *marketing* themselves as being cool and open -- when they're not.
"This isn't about individuals, its about manufacturers of cheap knock-offs further diluting the market, and tarnishing Android's image."
And where is "open" source in all of this?
Sounds to me like Google is having its cake, and eating it too.
Android is "open source" which means that any manufacturer who uses it can do whatever they want with it... except, according to Google's license regarding Google mobile apps and the Android Store... they can't. Any user is free to download the source and modify it... when it's released, if it's released, and if the manufacturer hasn't locked the device down. All of the Android source is "open". Except, of course, for the parts that are proprietary, and the aforementioned apps and services.
Regardless, from my perspective mentoring is largely about passing on some advice, some pointers and perhaps offer a few possible approaches to solving problems. Mostly because we've seen many of them before.
And as I also said before, please bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new. It's funny you mentioned functional code, because the new darling on the block [sic] is Clojure. Functional languages are great for certain problems, but tend to suck at others, as the LISP guys learned long ago.
Stick around long enough, and you'll watch the fads and "best practices" come and go. Assembly moves on to stack-based which moves on to procedure which moves on to functional which moves on to objects. Object systems morph into component systems (ActiveX), and then into full-blown byte-code VMs (UCSD Pascal, anyone?). Pure object-based systems lose their luster, and the "solution" is XML-driven configuration and binding. The web pops up, and we get ASP and PHP (procedural) which gain objects (C#, PHP5), and the whole thing spins 'round and 'round.
"That said, these days I have a decent enough resumé but when I was just out of college I had nothing "real" to show (and most employers seemed to hold anything that wasn't either major contributions to well-known projects or professional experience in very low regard)."
Which was the point of the article.
Without experience, in all likelihood you're just another grad with a standard resume. Actively working on a personal and/or open-source project is a way to differentiate yourself.
"That's the same retail price - not the wholesale price."
This excerpt from TFA might be appropriate here...
1) The publisher is now the retailer of record. The company selling the eBook to the end user is an “agent” of the retailer who receives a commission on the sale. 2) All sales agents are required to sell books at the same retail price, which is set by the publisher. No one can sell at a different price. 3) All sales agents get a 30% commission on the sale of a book. No one gets a different deal. Prior to the agency model, publishers typically offered retailers a 50% discount.
So... wrong. All agency model ebooks are sold at the same retail price (2), and all agency model ebooks are "wholesaled" at the same commission rate (3). BeamItDown's problem is that Apple's cut is 30% and the agency commission is 30%, which, subtracting one from the other, leaves zip for them.
Now, Apple's cut is only on items sold directly from the device. That means that sales from their website are not subject to Apple's 30% cut, which means that they could try to subsist on store sales, but those might be a bit thin. Then again, you have to have a BeamItDown account, which means they have user information, which means that they *could* potentially send out monthly sales notices and so forth, driving people to purchase from their site instead of through the app store.
Personally, I think Apple needs to cut the rate to 10% or so and remember that the vast bulk of their income comes from selling iPads and iPhones and iPods. Remember their push for DRM-free music on iPods?
More content means more demand for the devices on which to run them.
Precisely. How many people "unpopular in the hallways of high school" did NOT turn out so well?
It's the same article as the one that points to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs as super-successful college dropouts... with the inherent implication that you too could be just as successful if *you* dropped out of college and tried to start your own computer company in your garage.
And what's the number of people who *were* popular who turned out to be successful?
I bet that success rate is higher than the unpopular rate, as popular people tend to socialize and network more, which in turn leads to more opportunities...
Sigh. Why does everyone here always have to deal in absolutes? Either this OR that?
How about: As a general rule, try to find people who've demonstrated some interest in the field *outside* of class projects, or who have something they've done on their own that you can inspect and question?
Now, if you think you've found a "gem" that doesn't fit the "filters", then by all means go with your gut. But know that you've just made an exception to your general policy, and take responsibility for it if and when it doesn't pan out. And, of course, full credit if it does. (grin)
"If you're young and have a "mentor" who is over 35 I think you're going to hear a lot of prejudice against the good new ideas, and that they will want you to learn what that they can continue to mentor you in, not what's most relevant or useful."
Well... I'm 54, and have been programming since 1972. COBOL and Fortran. PDF-8 and 11. IBM 360/370 AS. Smalltalk. 6502 and BASIC. 68K and Object Pascal for Mac. 8086 and C++/MFC for Windows. Java. Transact-SQL and ASP and ColdFusion and JavaScript and JQuery for the web. PHP. Objective-C for the iPhone and iPad and Mac OS-X. And that doesn't even begin to count the things I've dabbled in, like Forth and LISP and Ruby.
I think you're painting with too wide a brush. Some people choose to remain stuck in the past. Some people embrace the future. I love programming because the field is continually and constantly changing. There's always something new to be discovered and learned, and that inspires me and encourages me to grow and change and adapt right along with it.
I guess the only point I'm making is that not all mentors "resist change". You just need to find the right one, and also, perhaps, keep an open mind as to what might be "relevant" or "useful". And bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new.
Of course, you often need "hard won experience" to realize that... (grin)
"If you're young and have a "mentor" who is over 35 I think you're going to hear a lot of prejudice against the good new ideas, and that they will want you to learn what that they can continue to mentor you in, not what's most relevant or useful."
Well... I'm 54, and have been programming since 1972. COBOL and Fortran. PDF-8 and 11. IBM 360/370 AS. Smalltalk. 6502 and BASIC. 68K and Object Pascal for Mac. 8086 and C++/MFC for Windows. Java. Transact-SQL and ASP and ColdFusion and JavaScript and JQuery for the web. PHP. Objective-C for the iPhone and iPad and Mac OS-X. And that doesn't even begin to count the things I've dabbled in, like Forth and LISP and Ruby.
I think you're painting with too wide a brush. Some people choose to remain stuck in the past. Some people embrace the future. I love programming because the field is continually and constantly changing. There's always something new to be discovered and learned, and that inspires me and encourages me to grow and change and adapt right along with it.
I guess the only point I'm making is that not all mentors "resist change". You just need to find the right one, and also, perhaps, keep an open mind as to what might be "relevant" or "useful". And bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new.
Of course, you often need "hard won experience" to realize that... (grin)
Look at it that way, and you'll never find the time. Skip lunch with the guys for a while, brown bag it, and read a development book at the same time. Can you listen to a podcast while in transit to work? Is keeping up with your Facebook page *that* important? Do you really need to watch that late night talk show? And so on.
You don't "find" large blocks of free time. If it's worth doing, and if it's important to you, then you *make* the time, in bits and pieces, whenever and however you can. Yes, it may be difficult for a while... but if it gets you a better job, or more money, or better hours... isn't it worth it?
If the answer to that question is yes, then congratulations. You're ahead of the game.
But if all you can think of are reasons why doing any of the above is simply not possible for you... then that's fine too. You've just answered the "worth doing" and "important to you" questions, and, like most people, you can just forget the whole thing, turn over, and go back to sleep...
"If you have "users that don't exist", you don't have a web application; you just have a set of static web pages."
Ummm... static web pages are static HTML, served without change to the browser. Applications create dynamic web pages, and plenty of web applications exist that don't need "user accounts".
Write some code that reverses words, or schedules email notifications for a given date and time, or does Whois or domain lookups, or does financial home mortgage interest calculations, or uses Google's search API to display results in a better format, or do a web service that *correctly* validates an email address, or displays family photos in a custom jQuery album, or...
Or not. You see, you're the one that has to prove yourself to an employer.... and doing nothing only proves you can do nothing.
"Which is why I'm trying to find answers to the excuses so that people can start building a portfolio."
Telling comment, that. Not, "Which is why I'm trying to find answers to the excuses so that *I* can start building a portfolio." But so that other "people" can start building a portfolio.
"Most people don't have time or a even a reason to be writing code while they are in school..."
If you're a photographer, you take pictures. If you're a writer, you write. If you're a developer, you code. If you don't have enough passion or interest in the subject of your major to actually do those things, then I might suggest looking for another major...
The world needs more passionate people, and fewer drones...
True. Employers want people who're passionate about the things that they do, from design to development. If his sole interest in development is simply a paycheck, that's going to count against him in a big way...
"I ended up working tech support for over a year because I couldn't find a "real job"..."
Sounds like you had plenty of time to develop an app, or build a web site, or contribute to an OSS project. Could have done the same during school. 'Course, that could have cut into the social scene, or limited the number of nights you could spend playing Halo.
There's an old quote that goes something like, "When you're not practicing, just remember that someone else out there *is* practicing, and that when you meet, he will win..."
If you don't work to develop a competitive advantage for yourself... who will?
"How is "Your current setup is insecure, and it could get intruded like Sony recently was" not a result?"
How much credit card data is on your personal shared hosted server? How much incentive is there for someone to hack a personal demonstration account on a site with few to no visitors? How many free non-SSL sites hosted on Apache servers are taken down daily? Again, you've managed to come up with plenty of excuses for doing nothing at all.
"When one has little capital on which to fall back, one must choose the investment with the least risk."
The investment with the least risk tends to have the least reward. Anyone can do nothing. Most do as little as possible. Sounds like you've got that part covered.
"You mean $698 for the first year..."
Say what? Download the iOS SDK for free. Stanford University development classes are available on iTunesU for free. Books and manuals are available on iBooks for free. Sample code is free on Apple's web site. Develop and do your initial testing for free. Show your work. If you get positive feedback, then go on.
Pretty much the same for Android. And that's available on Windows and Linux and OS X.
But I'm sure you're going to tell me why you can't do any of those things either.
Ah well. It was fun, but I guess it's time to stop feeding the basement cave trolls....
Still don't know what you're saying. Are you looking for someone to hire you AND train you? You can't afford -- or won't afford -- to train yourself, so someone else should do it for you?
You've taken, what, four classes total? How could anyone do that and conceivably expect to be hired as a developer? That's like taking a couple of biology or physics classes and expecting to be hired as a doctor or engineer. There's the knowledge gained by school and study, and the knowledge gained from experience. All the author of the article is saying is that he expects a potential hire to have both, and be able to demonstrate it.
If you were paying your own money to hire someone to work for your business, what would you expect?
And if you decided to hire a beginner, wouldn't you at least hire the one who's demonstrated SOME sort of commitment to his craft? Or would you hire the guy who seems sincere, but has nothing but excuses as to why he has nothing to show you? "Well, I wanted to write something, but I work and I have a kid and I have a bowling league and I just..."
Note that if you do hire Mr. Sincere, I promise you that the excuses you hear now will be many of the same ones you'll hear again later on. "Boss, I wanted to get the project done in time for the meeting... But..."
Please, please, please post your real name and current city/state. I want to make sure that I never, ever hire you, even by accident.
So let me see if have this straight: You can't develop a web site or web application because you think you require an SSL cert, and that's because someone might intercept your session cookies using Firesheep. Assuming, of course, that you connected to said server over a public local network. That about cover it? You can't do it because something *might* happen?
You couldn't, of course, use a free VPN to connect to your non-SSL-enabled server? Or use a paid VPN service that costs all of... say, $5 a month? Never mind. But here's a free tip: Employers want people who can actually find solutions to problems. They do not want employees who do not know how to seek them out, or worse, who're too lazy to find them on their own.
In short, they want results, not excuses.
And even if you HAD to pay $20/month for a suitable web site service, why the **** wouldn't you simply consider it as an investment in your future? Heck, people pay more than that for resume services.
You remind me of the guy who's too cheap to spend $99 to become an iOS developer... and in the process gain access to multi-billion dollar marketplace.
"He's using discrete components and actual wire and solder to cobble the boards into a single computer. He uses perf-board and socketed chips to build his extra peripherals.... The Apple II board was built by a hacker, for hackers. That makes it the obvious choice in a nutshell."
That's how stuff was done back them. Processors and RAM were dropped into sockets. Boards had discrete parts. "Upgrades" meant filling in the empty RAM sockets so you had 48K of RAM and not just 16K.
"How many failures, even cheap to produce failures, can a company sustain and remain viable?"
Hasn't that been the main business model for the music industry? The book publishing industry? The movie industry? Heck, for the venture capital industry?
You produce a lot of stuff, most at least make their bones, and the occasional blockbuster more than subsidizes all of failures.
Are iPods not competitively priced at a wide variety of price points? Are iPhones not available for the same $199 or $49 carrier subsidy as Androids and Blackberrys? Are tablet manufacturers not having fits trying to meet the iPad's $499 price point?
Slashdot Mirror
Firefox is open source, and daily builds are available. Linux is open source, and daily builds are available. MySQL is open source, and daily builds are available. Apache is open source, and daily builds are available.
All are large, complex programs and platforms, with reputations to maintain and uphold.
Android is "open source" and... Google will release code when they're good and ready.
Further, 3.0 has shipped. 3.1 has shipped. And yet, Google will not release the source code for the current, shipping version, until the NEXT version is available and ships.
Seems to me that they're getting an awful lot of mileage *marketing* themselves as being cool and open -- when they're not.
"This isn't about individuals, its about manufacturers of cheap knock-offs further diluting the market, and tarnishing Android's image."
And where is "open" source in all of this?
Sounds to me like Google is having its cake, and eating it too.
Android is "open source" which means that any manufacturer who uses it can do whatever they want with it... except, according to Google's license regarding Google mobile apps and the Android Store... they can't. Any user is free to download the source and modify it... when it's released, if it's released, and if the manufacturer hasn't locked the device down. All of the Android source is "open". Except, of course, for the parts that are proprietary, and the aforementioned apps and services.
But it's OPEN!!!!
I did mention JQuery above, didn't I? (grin)
Regardless, from my perspective mentoring is largely about passing on some advice, some pointers and perhaps offer a few possible approaches to solving problems. Mostly because we've seen many of them before.
And as I also said before, please bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new. It's funny you mentioned functional code, because the new darling on the block [sic] is Clojure. Functional languages are great for certain problems, but tend to suck at others, as the LISP guys learned long ago.
Stick around long enough, and you'll watch the fads and "best practices" come and go. Assembly moves on to stack-based which moves on to procedure which moves on to functional which moves on to objects. Object systems morph into component systems (ActiveX), and then into full-blown byte-code VMs (UCSD Pascal, anyone?). Pure object-based systems lose their luster, and the "solution" is XML-driven configuration and binding. The web pops up, and we get ASP and PHP (procedural) which gain objects (C#, PHP5), and the whole thing spins 'round and 'round.
"That said, these days I have a decent enough resumé but when I was just out of college I had nothing "real" to show (and most employers seemed to hold anything that wasn't either major contributions to well-known projects or professional experience in very low regard)."
Which was the point of the article.
Without experience, in all likelihood you're just another grad with a standard resume. Actively working on a personal and/or open-source project is a way to differentiate yourself.
"A Mac mini to run it on costs $599."
And I suppose your current Windows / Linux / Whatever machine was free?
"I'll stick to Android."
Yes! Android needs more developers who aren't afraid to take risks!
"That's the same retail price - not the wholesale price."
This excerpt from TFA might be appropriate here...
1) The publisher is now the retailer of record. The company selling the eBook to the end user is an “agent” of the retailer who receives a commission on the sale.
2) All sales agents are required to sell books at the same retail price, which is set by the publisher. No one can sell at a different price.
3) All sales agents get a 30% commission on the sale of a book. No one gets a different deal. Prior to the agency model, publishers typically offered retailers a 50% discount.
So... wrong. All agency model ebooks are sold at the same retail price (2), and all agency model ebooks are "wholesaled" at the same commission rate (3). BeamItDown's problem is that Apple's cut is 30% and the agency commission is 30%, which, subtracting one from the other, leaves zip for them.
Now, Apple's cut is only on items sold directly from the device. That means that sales from their website are not subject to Apple's 30% cut, which means that they could try to subsist on store sales, but those might be a bit thin. Then again, you have to have a BeamItDown account, which means they have user information, which means that they *could* potentially send out monthly sales notices and so forth, driving people to purchase from their site instead of through the app store.
Personally, I think Apple needs to cut the rate to 10% or so and remember that the vast bulk of their income comes from selling iPads and iPhones and iPods. Remember their push for DRM-free music on iPods?
More content means more demand for the devices on which to run them.
"Correlation != Causation"
Precisely. How many people "unpopular in the hallways of high school" did NOT turn out so well?
It's the same article as the one that points to Bill Gates and Steve Jobs as super-successful college dropouts... with the inherent implication that you too could be just as successful if *you* dropped out of college and tried to start your own computer company in your garage.
And what's the number of people who *were* popular who turned out to be successful?
I bet that success rate is higher than the unpopular rate, as popular people tend to socialize and network more, which in turn leads to more opportunities...
"I'd rather get a n00b who wants to be great ..."
Who doesn't *want* to be great? Now find me the passionate guy who has put some actual effort into *becoming* great...
Sigh. Why does everyone here always have to deal in absolutes? Either this OR that?
How about: As a general rule, try to find people who've demonstrated some interest in the field *outside* of class projects, or who have something they've done on their own that you can inspect and question?
Now, if you think you've found a "gem" that doesn't fit the "filters", then by all means go with your gut. But know that you've just made an exception to your general policy, and take responsibility for it if and when it doesn't pan out. And, of course, full credit if it does. (grin)
"If you're young and have a "mentor" who is over 35 I think you're going to hear a lot of prejudice against the good new ideas, and that they will want you to learn what that they can continue to mentor you in, not what's most relevant or useful."
Well... I'm 54, and have been programming since 1972. COBOL and Fortran. PDF-8 and 11. IBM 360/370 AS. Smalltalk. 6502 and BASIC. 68K and Object Pascal for Mac. 8086 and C++/MFC for Windows. Java. Transact-SQL and ASP and ColdFusion and JavaScript and JQuery for the web. PHP. Objective-C for the iPhone and iPad and Mac OS-X. And that doesn't even begin to count the things I've dabbled in, like Forth and LISP and Ruby.
I think you're painting with too wide a brush. Some people choose to remain stuck in the past. Some people embrace the future. I love programming because the field is continually and constantly changing. There's always something new to be discovered and learned, and that inspires me and encourages me to grow and change and adapt right along with it.
I guess the only point I'm making is that not all mentors "resist change". You just need to find the right one, and also, perhaps, keep an open mind as to what might be "relevant" or "useful". And bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new.
Of course, you often need "hard won experience" to realize that... (grin)
"If you're young and have a "mentor" who is over 35 I think you're going to hear a lot of prejudice against the good new ideas, and that they will want you to learn what that they can continue to mentor you in, not what's most relevant or useful."
Well... I'm 54, and have been programming since 1972. COBOL and Fortran. PDF-8 and 11. IBM 360/370 AS. Smalltalk. 6502 and BASIC. 68K and Object Pascal for Mac. 8086 and C++/MFC for Windows. Java. Transact-SQL and ASP and ColdFusion and JavaScript and JQuery for the web. PHP. Objective-C for the iPhone and iPad and Mac OS-X. And that doesn't even begin to count the things I've dabbled in, like Forth and LISP and Ruby.
I think you're painting with too wide a brush. Some people choose to remain stuck in the past. Some people embrace the future. I love programming because the field is continually and constantly changing. There's always something new to be discovered and learned, and that inspires me and encourages me to grow and change and adapt right along with it.
I guess the only point I'm making is that not all mentors "resist change". You just need to find the right one, and also, perhaps, keep an open mind as to what might be "relevant" or "useful". And bear in mind that not all ideas are good simply because they're new.
Of course, you often need "hard won experience" to realize that... (grin)
Have fun, and enjoy the ride.
Look at it that way, and you'll never find the time. Skip lunch with the guys for a while, brown bag it, and read a development book at the same time. Can you listen to a podcast while in transit to work? Is keeping up with your Facebook page *that* important? Do you really need to watch that late night talk show? And so on.
You don't "find" large blocks of free time. If it's worth doing, and if it's important to you, then you *make* the time, in bits and pieces, whenever and however you can. Yes, it may be difficult for a while... but if it gets you a better job, or more money, or better hours... isn't it worth it?
If the answer to that question is yes, then congratulations. You're ahead of the game.
But if all you can think of are reasons why doing any of the above is simply not possible for you... then that's fine too. You've just answered the "worth doing" and "important to you" questions, and, like most people, you can just forget the whole thing, turn over, and go back to sleep...
"If you have "users that don't exist", you don't have a web application; you just have a set of static web pages."
Ummm... static web pages are static HTML, served without change to the browser. Applications create dynamic web pages, and plenty of web applications exist that don't need "user accounts".
Write some code that reverses words, or schedules email notifications for a given date and time, or does Whois or domain lookups, or does financial home mortgage interest calculations, or uses Google's search API to display results in a better format, or do a web service that *correctly* validates an email address, or displays family photos in a custom jQuery album, or...
Or not. You see, you're the one that has to prove yourself to an employer.... and doing nothing only proves you can do nothing.
Don't you think there's just a little difference between a typical assignment or homework, and a full-blown semester-long team effort?
"Which is why I'm trying to find answers to the excuses so that people can start building a portfolio."
Telling comment, that. Not, "Which is why I'm trying to find answers to the excuses so that *I* can start building a portfolio." But so that other "people" can start building a portfolio.
"Most people don't have time or a even a reason to be writing code while they are in school..."
If you're a photographer, you take pictures. If you're a writer, you write. If you're a developer, you code. If you don't have enough passion or interest in the subject of your major to actually do those things, then I might suggest looking for another major...
The world needs more passionate people, and fewer drones...
"That alone might stop Google hiring you."
True. Employers want people who're passionate about the things that they do, from design to development. If his sole interest in development is simply a paycheck, that's going to count against him in a big way...
"I ended up working tech support for over a year because I couldn't find a "real job"..."
Sounds like you had plenty of time to develop an app, or build a web site, or contribute to an OSS project. Could have done the same during school. 'Course, that could have cut into the social scene, or limited the number of nights you could spend playing Halo.
There's an old quote that goes something like, "When you're not practicing, just remember that someone else out there *is* practicing, and that when you meet, he will win..."
If you don't work to develop a competitive advantage for yourself... who will?
"How is "Your current setup is insecure, and it could get intruded like Sony recently was" not a result?"
How much credit card data is on your personal shared hosted server? How much incentive is there for someone to hack a personal demonstration account on a site with few to no visitors? How many free non-SSL sites hosted on Apache servers are taken down daily? Again, you've managed to come up with plenty of excuses for doing nothing at all.
"When one has little capital on which to fall back, one must choose the investment with the least risk."
The investment with the least risk tends to have the least reward. Anyone can do nothing. Most do as little as possible. Sounds like you've got that part covered.
"You mean $698 for the first year..."
Say what? Download the iOS SDK for free. Stanford University development classes are available on iTunesU for free. Books and manuals are available on iBooks for free. Sample code is free on Apple's web site. Develop and do your initial testing for free. Show your work. If you get positive feedback, then go on.
Pretty much the same for Android. And that's available on Windows and Linux and OS X.
But I'm sure you're going to tell me why you can't do any of those things either.
Ah well. It was fun, but I guess it's time to stop feeding the basement cave trolls....
Still don't know what you're saying. Are you looking for someone to hire you AND train you? You can't afford -- or won't afford -- to train yourself, so someone else should do it for you?
You've taken, what, four classes total? How could anyone do that and conceivably expect to be hired as a developer? That's like taking a couple of biology or physics classes and expecting to be hired as a doctor or engineer. There's the knowledge gained by school and study, and the knowledge gained from experience. All the author of the article is saying is that he expects a potential hire to have both, and be able to demonstrate it.
If you were paying your own money to hire someone to work for your business, what would you expect?
And if you decided to hire a beginner, wouldn't you at least hire the one who's demonstrated SOME sort of commitment to his craft? Or would you hire the guy who seems sincere, but has nothing but excuses as to why he has nothing to show you? "Well, I wanted to write something, but I work and I have a kid and I have a bowling league and I just..."
Note that if you do hire Mr. Sincere, I promise you that the excuses you hear now will be many of the same ones you'll hear again later on. "Boss, I wanted to get the project done in time for the meeting... But..."
Please, please, please post your real name and current city/state. I want to make sure that I never, ever hire you, even by accident.
So let me see if have this straight: You can't develop a web site or web application because you think you require an SSL cert, and that's because someone might intercept your session cookies using Firesheep. Assuming, of course, that you connected to said server over a public local network. That about cover it? You can't do it because something *might* happen?
You couldn't, of course, use a free VPN to connect to your non-SSL-enabled server? Or use a paid VPN service that costs all of... say, $5 a month? Never mind. But here's a free tip: Employers want people who can actually find solutions to problems. They do not want employees who do not know how to seek them out, or worse, who're too lazy to find them on their own.
In short, they want results, not excuses.
And even if you HAD to pay $20/month for a suitable web site service, why the **** wouldn't you simply consider it as an investment in your future? Heck, people pay more than that for resume services.
You remind me of the guy who's too cheap to spend $99 to become an iOS developer... and in the process gain access to multi-billion dollar marketplace.
"... it seems like only yesterday that I could have spent several times as much money to upgrade a machine to 8MB."
Several times? I once upgraded my first Macintosh II to 8MB of RAM, and I swear I paid at least $1,1000 to do so...
"He's using discrete components and actual wire and solder to cobble the boards into a single computer. He uses perf-board and socketed chips to build his extra peripherals. ... The Apple II board was built by a hacker, for hackers. That makes it the obvious choice in a nutshell."
That's how stuff was done back them. Processors and RAM were dropped into sockets. Boards had discrete parts. "Upgrades" meant filling in the empty RAM sockets so you had 48K of RAM and not just 16K.
"How many failures, even cheap to produce failures, can a company sustain and remain viable?"
Hasn't that been the main business model for the music industry? The book publishing industry? The movie industry? Heck, for the venture capital industry?
You produce a lot of stuff, most at least make their bones, and the occasional blockbuster more than subsidizes all of failures.
Are iPods not competitively priced at a wide variety of price points? Are iPhones not available for the same $199 or $49 carrier subsidy as Androids and Blackberrys? Are tablet manufacturers not having fits trying to meet the iPad's $499 price point?
Stop repeating what everyone "knows"...