A lot of people are really smug and say "Sorry my NDA won't let me". This is a clever way to get people to admit they never code anything for fun, and as far as I'm concerned, that is a *very* damning statement about an engineer.
Furthermore, even if you didn't have an NDA, a 200 line snippet of commercial code is rarely very interesting at all. The code for "confirm empty recycle bin" isn't getting you hired.
My advice: * Solve an algorithmically difficult problem efficiently. Here's a site with a few examples: http://www.itasoftware.com/careers/jlisting.html?jid=20 * Include integrated test cases. Smart programmers know they make mistakes. Make it dreadfully obvious that your program is correct. * Don't be too clever. Demonstrate that a 1% performance improvement must justify any incomprehensibility that it introduces. One thing that *really* pisses me off is when candidates write optimizations that any reasonable optimizing compiler would do. * Have good comments. * No compiler warnings if you want the job. Keep in mind they may compile it in a different environment. * If you have the time, make it tangentially related to the company -- a small opengl demo for a game company, a graph algorithm for a search engine company, something tricky in c for an os company, etc. * Don't write it in Java, even if it's a Java job. Monkeys can write Java. * Be elegant with formatting. It doesn't really matter what spacing/indenting standard you follow, but be consistent. * Don't pretty-print it on your website. Provide it in compiler-friendly format.
Also, as far as stealing open source code and claiming you wrote it... if they suspect you're full of shit, they'll do a google search for it, and almost all open source code gets pretty-printed onto websites these days, and that sort of thing is an instant rejection.
so why does the power company _need_ to know what your power usage is at all times? don't you think the DEA would like to know which residential customers switch 2000 watt loads on an exact 16 hour on / 8 hour off (etc) schedule? of course, power companies would *never* release information like that without a warrant...
ah, the days of the HP48. when all the dumb people were using their ti-82's, the college board frowned upon the hp48. why? because you could make a small adjustment to make the IR port, with which you could talk to other test-takers, at distances of up to 30 feet. it also included a serial port capable of kermit and z-modem; a true hacker's machine.
the important difference between this "war" and any other is not that we don't know who the enemy is; it is that it is that the suspects are quite often citizens of this country. in previous wars rights were given up to help defeat a foreign enemy; in this war (like in the war on drugs) rights are being taken away to attack our own citizens.
now then. my pgp key is posted on my/. user page. is _yours_ ?
booth:~# apt-get install harrybrowne
Reading Politician Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following politicians will be REMOVED:
georgewbush dickcheney
The following NEW politiciams will be installed:
harrybrowne artolivier
0 politicians upgraded, 2 newly installed, 2 to remove and 538 not upgraded.
Need to get 2/2 politicians. After unpacking 0 will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]y
Get:1 http://http.us.debian.org stable/libertarian harrybrowne 3.04-6.1 [520kB]
Fetched 520kB in 4m26s (1953B/s)
Get:2 http://http.us.debian.org stable/libertarian artolivier 2.43-5.2 [450kB]
Fetched 450 kB in 3m52s (1985B/s)
(Reading database... 539 politicians currently installed.)
Impeaching georgewbush...
Impeaching dickcheney...
Selecting previously deselected package harrybrowne.
Unpacking harrybrowne (from.../harrybrowne_3.04-6.1_i386.deb)...
Selecting previously deselected package artolivier.
Unpacking artolivier (from.../artolivier_2.53-5.2_i386.deb)...
(Reading database... 538 politicians currently installed.)
Inaugurating harrybrowne (3.04-6.1)...
Inaugurating artolivier (2.53-5.2)...
booth:~#
Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain
The population of interest is computer gamers but the sample is taken from those gamers who go to competitions. Therefore the sample is not random and one ought not make conclusions about all gamers based on gamers who go to competitions.
A recent study by the Home Office indicated that those who regularly played computer games when young were more likely to go to university and get a better-than-average job
Someone already mentioned correlation != causation, but I'll elaborate. Television sets are much cheaper than computers and internet access; also, university attendance is very much correlated to income. I don't have survey data to back this up, but it seems that income ought to have been considered to make sure that it's not a lurking variable. (affects both variables but is unseen)
It's disturbing how hypocritical so many slashdotters are about free speech. It's perfectly fine to throw it out the window when you're pissed about spam but you'll be damned if you can't post DeCSS or cracked mattel databases or whatever we're rallying around today.
But the fact remains that speech is either protected or it's not, and when you say spam is illegal what you're saying is illegal for a corporation to contact an individual, and that is crossing the line on the first ammendment. So you say that they're using your resources... excuse me, but why exactly is it that you left port 25 open? By having an email server and address you are implicitly permitting anyone who wants to send you email. In other words, would you like to get sued every time you send someone an email without their permission?
I don't like spam any more than the next guy -- but I would rather see a technical solution than a legislative one. Hash Cash (as discussed above) is one idea, but seriously, why not just mandate the use of PGP on everything sent to you?
As it is now, owning stock is purely an asset, never a liability. This way people can invest in companies without worrying about the liability. And that assumes that they know about the liability; how well do you know the board of trustees of every company you own stock in? Even then, a system like this has huge potential for abuse, e.g. corrupt management that can commit crimes for their own personal good and then pass the blame onto naive shareholders who have been duped into thinking management was "nice".
Also, remember companies can also go bankrupt without doing anything illegal or even "mean", and lately on NASDAQ we've all seen plenty of them go that way.
Who wants to buy those stock options in their tech startup NOW?
...are a sign of a company that could be operating more efficiently. The company I work at I consider to be one of the more well managed technology companies; the idea of having a union there is absurd.
When workes unionize they are saying "our interests are different from our company's interests" - this is not a sign of a healthy company.
Given that humans are terrible greedy beings it is inevitable that certain occupations will be unionized; electricians, carpenters, etc- but these professions are inherently different from technology workers. Management can easily fire any particular plumber, electrician, or whatever- they tend to be less invested in a particular job. However, techies who know their stuff tend to have relatively secure jobs without being in a union. (No, I'm not talking about all those 1999 nasdaq-high impulse hires.)
To summarize, unions are only useful in slow moving, bureaucracy-laden industries employing legions of interchangable workers; if you are a truly valuable employee you don't need a union and if you're not, well, don't expect a union to save you...
An ASP is, essentially, trusting someone else with something you don't trust yourself with. In many cases it is a wise decision, e.g. should Mom & Pop's neighborhood small business try to run their own accounting system or let IBM do it? However, it is of vital importance to remember that you are trusting your mission critical apps to someone else - and these are the sorts of things that a business would not be prudent to rely on a contract to protect.
So, in short, don't sign up with an ASP you don't trust. (When I say "trust" what I mean is you trust that they 1. don't go out of business 2. don't screw up 3. don't attempt to screw you over, etc... no small amount of trust.) Which pretty much means don't mess around with VC fueled startups. I suppose it would also be a good idea to have an escape plan (e.g. some way to export your data into a competitor's system) but by no means does it alleviate rule #1.
There seems to be a trend in the "content industry" of sending people encrypted things along with the keys and hoping that because they invoked the buzzword god "encryption" they are safe.
repeat after me: If someone can read something, they can copy it. Obviously the computer screen can be saved (by screenshot, by decoding the video signal, by pointing a camera at it... whatever). However, it gets better
The fundamental flaw in the security models of this (and DVD) is that they trust the user's computer with the capability to decrypt the content. However, as the user's computer is controlled by the user and not the DRM company, the model is flawed.
There is no doubt in my mind that, should there ever be good reason to do so, this will be cracked. Additionally, what with recent events such as the SDMI fiasco, I believe that at this point basing your business model on DMCA protection of your security is risky. Also, remember that in many uses simply being able to prosecute people for cracking it might not cut it; after sensitive data has been leaked no amount of litigation can undo the potential damage.
To quote the oft-used cliche, The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. However, the truth in that statement comes from the inherent chaos and lack of central control, not from laws protecting speech.
P2P software such as OpenNAP will survive, but not because of Sealand. When Sealand opens a napster server the RIAA will send them a polite letter asking them to turn if off. They will not comply. Then the RIAA will send a similar letter to Sealand's ISP's - and Sealand will find themselves disconnected. ISP's are businesses and their duty is to increase shareholder value, not to protect free speech. (hint: fighting the RIAA in court doesn't increase shareholder value)
Now, as I was saying, OpenNAP will survive. Think about how long it takes someone to configure an OpenNAP server and how long it takes the RIAA to litigate one out of existance. Perhaps the next linux worm's payload will be that it assembles an OpenNAP server network, who knows...
As for encryption regulations, timothy's comment is sensationalist crap. Will politicians continue to outlaw things like strong encryption in order to save the children or something? Yes. Will the courts throw out the worst of them? Yes. Will it make any significant impact on the real world? No. In fact, I have a feeling that if they outlawed encryption actual use of it would increase.
Because you are not a hacker, don't know linux better than "hey, this computer is faster, cheaper, and more reliable than that one" and you just want a computer to write a paper, read email, etc. with. Either Linux is available preinstalled (with X, netscape, office suite, etc), or you buy a computer with Windows installed because you don't know how to install Linux.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of people are really smug and say "Sorry my NDA won't let me". This is a clever way to get people to admit they never code anything for fun, and as far as I'm concerned, that is a *very* damning statement about an engineer.
Furthermore, even if you didn't have an NDA, a 200 line snippet of commercial code is rarely very interesting at all. The code for "confirm empty recycle bin" isn't getting you hired.
My advice:
* Solve an algorithmically difficult problem efficiently. Here's a site with a few examples: http://www.itasoftware.com/careers/jlisting.html?jid=20
* Include integrated test cases. Smart programmers know they make mistakes. Make it dreadfully obvious that your program is correct.
* Don't be too clever. Demonstrate that a 1% performance improvement must justify any incomprehensibility that it introduces. One thing that *really* pisses me off is when candidates write optimizations that any reasonable optimizing compiler would do.
* Have good comments.
* No compiler warnings if you want the job. Keep in mind they may compile it in a different environment.
* If you have the time, make it tangentially related to the company -- a small opengl demo for a game company, a graph algorithm for a search engine company, something tricky in c for an os company, etc.
* Don't write it in Java, even if it's a Java job. Monkeys can write Java.
* Be elegant with formatting. It doesn't really matter what spacing/indenting standard you follow, but be consistent.
* Don't pretty-print it on your website. Provide it in compiler-friendly format.
Also, as far as stealing open source code and claiming you wrote it ... if they suspect you're full of shit, they'll do a google search for it, and almost all open source code gets pretty-printed onto websites these days, and that sort of thing is an instant rejection.
- only cost a few hundred bucks to build
- doesn't look like an insect
- RUNS LINUX.
see it hereso why does the power company _need_ to know what your power usage is at all times? don't you think the DEA would like to know which residential customers switch 2000 watt loads on an exact 16 hour on / 8 hour off (etc) schedule? of course, power companies would *never* release information like that without a warrant...
ah, the days of the HP48. when all the dumb people were using their ti-82's, the college board frowned upon the hp48. why? because you could make a small adjustment to make the IR port, with which you could talk to other test-takers, at distances of up to 30 feet. it also included a serial port capable of kermit and z-modem; a true hacker's machine.
...the number of stupid webpages sporting american flags and those silly "osama bin laden: wanted dead or alive" posters is expected to skyrocket.
the important difference between this "war" and any other is not that we don't know who the enemy is; it is that it is that the suspects are quite often citizens of this country. in previous wars rights were given up to help defeat a foreign enemy; in this war (like in the war on drugs) rights are being taken away to attack our own citizens.
/. user page. is _yours_ ?
now then. my pgp key is posted on my
booth:~# apt-get install harrybrowne ... 539 politicians currently installed.)
...
...
.../harrybrowne_3.04-6.1_i386.deb) ...
.../artolivier_2.53-5.2_i386.deb) ...
... 538 politicians currently installed.)
...
...
Reading Politician Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following politicians will be REMOVED:
georgewbush dickcheney
The following NEW politiciams will be installed:
harrybrowne artolivier
0 politicians upgraded, 2 newly installed, 2 to remove and 538 not upgraded.
Need to get 2/2 politicians. After unpacking 0 will be used.
Do you want to continue? [Y/n]y
Get:1 http://http.us.debian.org stable/libertarian harrybrowne 3.04-6.1 [520kB]
Fetched 520kB in 4m26s (1953B/s)
Get:2 http://http.us.debian.org stable/libertarian artolivier 2.43-5.2 [450kB]
Fetched 450 kB in 3m52s (1985B/s)
(Reading database
Impeaching georgewbush
Impeaching dickcheney
Selecting previously deselected package harrybrowne.
Unpacking harrybrowne (from
Selecting previously deselected package artolivier.
Unpacking artolivier (from
(Reading database
Inaugurating harrybrowne (3.04-6.1)
Inaugurating artolivier (2.53-5.2)
booth:~#
newsflash: communist governments censor their citizens
/.'ers whine when someone posts something about alan cox 24 hours late...
really?
...damn, and
Bryce did her research by visiting computer gamers, often during regional or national competitions around Britain
The population of interest is computer gamers but the sample is taken from those gamers who go to competitions. Therefore the sample is not random and one ought not make conclusions about all gamers based on gamers who go to competitions.
A recent study by the Home Office indicated that those who regularly played computer games when young were more likely to go to university and get a better-than-average job
Someone already mentioned correlation != causation, but I'll elaborate. Television sets are much cheaper than computers and internet access; also, university attendance is very much correlated to income. I don't have survey data to back this up, but it seems that income ought to have been considered to make sure that it's not a lurking variable. (affects both variables but is unseen)
</soapbox>
It's disturbing how hypocritical so many slashdotters are about free speech. It's perfectly fine to throw it out the window when you're pissed about spam but you'll be damned if you can't post DeCSS or cracked mattel databases or whatever we're rallying around today.
But the fact remains that speech is either protected or it's not, and when you say spam is illegal what you're saying is illegal for a corporation to contact an individual, and that is crossing the line on the first ammendment. So you say that they're using your resources... excuse me, but why exactly is it that you left port 25 open? By having an email server and address you are implicitly permitting anyone who wants to send you email. In other words, would you like to get sued every time you send someone an email without their permission?
I don't like spam any more than the next guy -- but I would rather see a technical solution than a legislative one. Hash Cash (as discussed above) is one idea, but seriously, why not just mandate the use of PGP on everything sent to you?
Limited liability corporations are a GOOD thing.
As it is now, owning stock is purely an asset, never a liability. This way people can invest in companies without worrying about the liability. And that assumes that they know about the liability; how well do you know the board of trustees of every company you own stock in? Even then, a system like this has huge potential for abuse, e.g. corrupt management that can commit crimes for their own personal good and then pass the blame onto naive shareholders who have been duped into thinking management was "nice".
Also, remember companies can also go bankrupt without doing anything illegal or even "mean", and lately on NASDAQ we've all seen plenty of them go that way.
Who wants to buy those stock options in their tech startup NOW?
...are a sign of a company that could be operating more efficiently. The company I work at I consider to be one of the more well managed technology companies; the idea of having a union there is absurd.
When workes unionize they are saying "our interests are different from our company's interests" - this is not a sign of a healthy company.
Given that humans are terrible greedy beings it is inevitable that certain occupations will be unionized; electricians, carpenters, etc- but these professions are inherently different from technology workers. Management can easily fire any particular plumber, electrician, or whatever- they tend to be less invested in a particular job. However, techies who know their stuff tend to have relatively secure jobs without being in a union. (No, I'm not talking about all those 1999 nasdaq-high impulse hires.)
To summarize, unions are only useful in slow moving, bureaucracy-laden industries employing legions of interchangable workers; if you are a truly valuable employee you don't need a union and if you're not, well, don't expect a union to save you...
An ASP is, essentially, trusting someone else with something you don't trust yourself with. In many cases it is a wise decision, e.g. should Mom & Pop's neighborhood small business try to run their own accounting system or let IBM do it? However, it is of vital importance to remember that you are trusting your mission critical apps to someone else - and these are the sorts of things that a business would not be prudent to rely on a contract to protect.
So, in short, don't sign up with an ASP you don't trust. (When I say "trust" what I mean is you trust that they 1. don't go out of business 2. don't screw up 3. don't attempt to screw you over, etc... no small amount of trust.) Which pretty much means don't mess around with VC fueled startups. I suppose it would also be a good idea to have an escape plan (e.g. some way to export your data into a competitor's system) but by no means does it alleviate rule #1.
There seems to be a trend in the "content industry" of sending people encrypted things along with the keys and hoping that because they invoked the buzzword god "encryption" they are safe.
repeat after me: If someone can read something, they can copy it. Obviously the computer screen can be saved (by screenshot, by decoding the video signal, by pointing a camera at it... whatever). However, it gets better
The fundamental flaw in the security models of this (and DVD) is that they trust the user's computer with the capability to decrypt the content. However, as the user's computer is controlled by the user and not the DRM company, the model is flawed.
There is no doubt in my mind that, should there ever be good reason to do so, this will be cracked. Additionally, what with recent events such as the SDMI fiasco, I believe that at this point basing your business model on DMCA protection of your security is risky. Also, remember that in many uses simply being able to prosecute people for cracking it might not cut it; after sensitive data has been leaked no amount of litigation can undo the potential damage.
To quote the oft-used cliche, The Internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. However, the truth in that statement comes from the inherent chaos and lack of central control, not from laws protecting speech.
P2P software such as OpenNAP will survive, but not because of Sealand. When Sealand opens a napster server the RIAA will send them a polite letter asking them to turn if off. They will not comply. Then the RIAA will send a similar letter to Sealand's ISP's - and Sealand will find themselves disconnected. ISP's are businesses and their duty is to increase shareholder value, not to protect free speech. (hint: fighting the RIAA in court doesn't increase shareholder value)
Now, as I was saying, OpenNAP will survive. Think about how long it takes someone to configure an OpenNAP server and how long it takes the RIAA to litigate one out of existance. Perhaps the next linux worm's payload will be that it assembles an OpenNAP server network, who knows...
As for encryption regulations, timothy's comment is sensationalist crap. Will politicians continue to outlaw things like strong encryption in order to save the children or something? Yes. Will the courts throw out the worst of them? Yes. Will it make any significant impact on the real world? No. In fact, I have a feeling that if they outlawed encryption actual use of it would increase.
China: ...pose a threat to the country's younger generation, who are becoming blighted by the "online poison"...
...where a child can walk in and can have their heart turned dark as a result of being on the Internet...
US (bush):
discuss amongst yourselves.
Because you are not a hacker, don't know linux better than "hey, this computer is faster, cheaper, and more reliable than that one" and you just want a computer to write a paper, read email, etc. with. Either Linux is available preinstalled (with X, netscape, office suite, etc), or you buy a computer with Windows installed because you don't know how to install Linux.