Sitting on the other side of the table was a real eye opener. People tend to list every last thing they've ever even come close to doing. I will ask questions about everything someone lists on a resume that I know about, even if it has nothing to do with the position they're interviewing for. I dislike it when people lie on their resume.
Sitting on the other side also made me realize just how crappy my resume was at the time.
However, I'm sure I'd fail on any Java test or C test.
Not necessarily. At my last job we would administer a C coding test to all of our prospective employees. I had an astonishing number of them that were syntactically perfect, would even execute correctly, but were simply awful. They would produce nothing but a main() function, or they would hard code to the sample data (eg I'd see lines like 'if ( id == 10 ) printf("Fred");')
And sometimes I'd get some samples where the syntax was shot, the functions didn't exist, had the arguments in the wrong order, or were just plain missing arguments. But thrown in with those were a sense of organization. Even though the code wasn't perfect, it was obvious what the guy was trying to accomplish and how he had split up the parts of the task. More than that, the code would show some flexibility. Minor changes to the input wouldn't require massive changes to the code.
The language of choice is important insofar as I want the candidate to at least know what C syntax looks like. It's also there because if I want a code sample, it has to be in some language, and I as the interviewer am going to make sure that it's a language I'm familiar with. But it's not what's most important to me. Syntax, function names, and various language trivia (i=i++ bad!) can all be learned in far less time than good design.
I'll pretend for a moment that these guys are idealists. If candidate X genuinely believes that his policies are absolutely right and his opponent's are wrong, then he should focus strongly on getting elected.
I've driven to visit my sister a few times, which is basically NYC to Atlanta. I take 95 South until it splits into 95/85, and then 85 to Atlanta. I usually end up timing it so that I get on 85 sometime between 1-3AM. While I'm in that part of Virginia, I get to a point where I stop believing that other people exist. The first time I made the trip I was instructed to get gas somewhere near Richmond as it would be a while before I had another chance.
I had done some very light/minor C++ dev in my time, so I included it as an item on my resume. Last time I was job hunting (about a year ago), 90% of the calls that I got were for C++ positions, which I really did not want. I ended up removing it to filter out the noise.
I understand what you're saying. To be fair though, I also understand the point of view of the people your post is targeting. Geeks often view the law as something that is supposed to behave in a very computer-like fashion, where it can be boiled down to something like:
Did party A commit act X?
If yes, apply fines.
If no, continue.
Did party B have a reasonable complaint against party A?
If yes, then we're done.
If no, then award lawyer's fees.
When viewed from that angle, Ms. Andersen's personal situation is obviously irrelevant. I suspect that very few of the people making that argument however would still necessarily argue that she *should* have been sued, and I think that by and large most of the people in this forum would see that as a completely distinct issue.
What I think bothers the crowd most is that it sounds as if what's being said is "Tanya Andersen got screwed over, and because she's disabled she's entitled to being compensated. Someone else (say with a decent income or from a family with money) would not be likewise entitled."
I don't think you've represented that position, but I could understand how some might perceive that.
Ethanol-fueled: I want a girlfriend with big boobs. mark-t: So let me get this straight... you *WANT* a girlfriend with boobs? Wouldn't you rather she had no boobs? close53421: Having big boobs would be impossible if the girl had no boobs. GP's statement therefore cannot be interpreted as a response to the situation where the girl has no boobs. If she does have boobs, he wants them to be big.
I'm no fan of the RIAA, but I like my toast to come out of the toaster before it's burnt. Sure I don't like their heavy handed methods, but my next door neighbor has a gigantic dog that actually outmasses me.
I just want to mess with your statistics on this one:)
If I'm perfectly pleasant and do proselytize--that is, discuss questions of religion with people who disagree seeking to persuade them--can I still avoid the nutjob label?
If not, do I get to call atheists who argue for atheism "nutjobs"?
Hmm... For that matter, either way, do I get to call an unpleasant atheist a nutjob?
Nutjob might be a bit harsh, but unsolicited evangelism of any kind is irritating at best, and generally obnoxious. That does include atheistic evangelism, or whatever it might more properly be called since that sounds somewhat self contradictory.
Unpleasant people of all stripes generally fall under the 'jerk' label.
When I was taking French, I was taking a test and had to translate the phrase "There's a crowd at the ticket window." into French. The word for crowd is 'foule', but all I could think of was 'poule'. I knew it was wrong, but suddenly I couldn't get the visual out of my head. It took enormous effort not to bust out laughing in the middle of the test.
I once had a work email filter that would only filter out very specific full word matches. It didn't like fuck, but had no problem with fucking, fucker, or similar words. Most of us had figured out its tolerance within a few hours of it going up (I actually sent myself about 50 emails to see what would or wouldn't make it through).
Slashdot Mirror
Sitting on the other side of the table was a real eye opener. People tend to list every last thing they've ever even come close to doing. I will ask questions about everything someone lists on a resume that I know about, even if it has nothing to do with the position they're interviewing for. I dislike it when people lie on their resume.
Sitting on the other side also made me realize just how crappy my resume was at the time.
90% of SQL Developer candidates don't know what "group by" is either. I could usually do some 1st level screening pretty quickly based on that.
However, I'm sure I'd fail on any Java test or C test.
Not necessarily. At my last job we would administer a C coding test to all of our prospective employees. I had an astonishing number of them that were syntactically perfect, would even execute correctly, but were simply awful. They would produce nothing but a main() function, or they would hard code to the sample data (eg I'd see lines like 'if ( id == 10 ) printf("Fred");')
And sometimes I'd get some samples where the syntax was shot, the functions didn't exist, had the arguments in the wrong order, or were just plain missing arguments. But thrown in with those were a sense of organization. Even though the code wasn't perfect, it was obvious what the guy was trying to accomplish and how he had split up the parts of the task. More than that, the code would show some flexibility. Minor changes to the input wouldn't require massive changes to the code.
The language of choice is important insofar as I want the candidate to at least know what C syntax looks like. It's also there because if I want a code sample, it has to be in some language, and I as the interviewer am going to make sure that it's a language I'm familiar with. But it's not what's most important to me. Syntax, function names, and various language trivia (i=i++ bad!) can all be learned in far less time than good design.
That depends entirely on what kind of RAID we're talking about...
I'll pretend for a moment that these guys are idealists. If candidate X genuinely believes that his policies are absolutely right and his opponent's are wrong, then he should focus strongly on getting elected.
It's a bad strategy if you ask me because he simply brought her on just to win the election...which is just stupid.
Instead of picking someone else with less of a chance of getting elected? That would be smarter how?
It is hard to overstate how bad this is.
This will end all life on earth.
That wasn't hard.
I've driven to visit my sister a few times, which is basically NYC to Atlanta. I take 95 South until it splits into 95/85, and then 85 to Atlanta. I usually end up timing it so that I get on 85 sometime between 1-3AM. While I'm in that part of Virginia, I get to a point where I stop believing that other people exist. The first time I made the trip I was instructed to get gas somewhere near Richmond as it would be a while before I had another chance.
I used to work with a guy who would routinely write "another words" in emails.
Anyone ever tried to get a C++ job?
I had done some very light/minor C++ dev in my time, so I included it as an item on my resume. Last time I was job hunting (about a year ago), 90% of the calls that I got were for C++ positions, which I really did not want. I ended up removing it to filter out the noise.
I understand what you're saying. To be fair though, I also understand the point of view of the people your post is targeting. Geeks often view the law as something that is supposed to behave in a very computer-like fashion, where it can be boiled down to something like:
Did party A commit act X?
If yes, apply fines.
If no, continue.
Did party B have a reasonable complaint against party A?
If yes, then we're done.
If no, then award lawyer's fees.
When viewed from that angle, Ms. Andersen's personal situation is obviously irrelevant. I suspect that very few of the people making that argument however would still necessarily argue that she *should* have been sued, and I think that by and large most of the people in this forum would see that as a completely distinct issue.
What I think bothers the crowd most is that it sounds as if what's being said is "Tanya Andersen got screwed over, and because she's disabled she's entitled to being compensated. Someone else (say with a decent income or from a family with money) would not be likewise entitled."
I don't think you've represented that position, but I could understand how some might perceive that.
they'll try a hostel take over
I agree with what you're saying, but this little typo got a visual in my head that I couldn't stop giggling about.
Very few stories on here are US-specific, and they should be labelled as such.
Kind of in the same way that very few roads are paved?
That's called explaining the joke. It makes it less funny.
I read it over one last time after hitting submit, spotted that mistake, and then thought "crap".
Ethanol-fueled: I want a girlfriend with big boobs.
mark-t: So let me get this straight... you *WANT* a girlfriend with boobs? Wouldn't you rather she had no boobs?
close53421: Having big boobs would be impossible if the girl had no boobs. GP's statement therefore cannot be interpreted as a response to the situation where the girl has no boobs. If she does have boobs, he wants them to be big.
No, that doesn't quite add up.
Wouldn't you need to also be on the same network as whatever RIAA user you're impersonating?
I'm no fan of the RIAA, but I like my toast to come out of the toaster before it's burnt.
Sure I don't like their heavy handed methods, but my next door neighbor has a gigantic dog that actually outmasses me.
I just want to mess with your statistics on this one :)
If I'm perfectly pleasant and do proselytize--that is, discuss questions of religion with people who disagree seeking to persuade them--can I still avoid the nutjob label?
If not, do I get to call atheists who argue for atheism "nutjobs"?
Hmm... For that matter, either way, do I get to call an unpleasant atheist a nutjob?
Nutjob might be a bit harsh, but unsolicited evangelism of any kind is irritating at best, and generally obnoxious. That does include atheistic evangelism, or whatever it might more properly be called since that sounds somewhat self contradictory.
Unpleasant people of all stripes generally fall under the 'jerk' label.
When I was taking French, I was taking a test and had to translate the phrase "There's a crowd at the ticket window." into French. The word for crowd is 'foule', but all I could think of was 'poule'. I knew it was wrong, but suddenly I couldn't get the visual out of my head. It took enormous effort not to bust out laughing in the middle of the test.
I once had a work email filter that would only filter out very specific full word matches. It didn't like fuck, but had no problem with fucking, fucker, or similar words. Most of us had figured out its tolerance within a few hours of it going up (I actually sent myself about 50 emails to see what would or wouldn't make it through).
Thank you. I checked the comments for absolutely no reason other than to see if someone made a 'Crazy Bitch' reference.
Am I seeing things, or does this story have no comments attached to it five hours after it was posted to slashdot?!?!
Actually, according to the time stamps I can see, you posted your comment 9 1/2 hours before the story was posted... funky.
... has to clean it up.
Is it a donkey show? If so, is it a male or female donkey? Think about it...