Past performance on other college board tests was one of the variables they considered in their model. If family income juices standardized test scores then using past test scores means income was implicitly part of their model.
Yeah. Ability to put up with B.S. is a big part of the job qualifications. Sadly, they don't include that in the description when we recruit candidates.
Where I work it tends to mean, "ability to cope with extreme disorganization and non-existent project management, and all the inefficiency and duplicated effort that entails, without becoming murderous".
I'm basing this off the fact that I got my current job around three years ago, when I was 37, without much trouble. That and the volume of recruiting emails I get (including two from Google in the past 6 months) despite my age being pretty obvious from my LinkedIn profile.
I'm 40 and I'm pretty sure I could get a job within a couple weeks if I lost my current one tomorrow. We'll see what the landscape looks like when I'm 45.
For what it's worth I've known "old" tech workers who don't "act" old, and I've known ones who do. So even though many companies may use "culture fit" as coded language for "too old" (or "too foreign"), there is still some truth to it. I've had to work with someone who acted like a grouchy old man and it wasn't enjoyable.
Can't just be the recruiters. Someone above them has to either be actively allowing them bring people back in who have already been rejected three times before or they're just so disorganized they don't keep records on that kind of thing. Given who we're talking about that seems less likely, but you never know. I can see maybe bringing someone in a second time if the first on-site interview is a "near miss", but four times? That's just weird.
Conservatively, let's say we could earn 2.5% annually in real terms (i.e. after inflation) on $10B. That's the rate the economy is projected to grow at long-term. So, $250M/year in perpetuity. That'd fund a lot of basic research, if that's what you're into.
I'd also feel better about spending $10B on a manned moon mission if the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio wasn't about 70% higher than it was 8 years ago.
In her decision, the judge noted a psychiatric and psychological assessment that she said painted a picture of a deeply troubled young person who is a high risk to reoffend.
The report suggested the teen has minimized his crimes and blamed the victims, showed no remorse and was motivated in the pleasure the trouble he inflicted on his victims.
"Passion for the craft" is why they get paid less and have crappy working conditions. Because they're committed to being a video game developer. There's a certain cool factor that motivates some devs to continue to work in that industry despite sub-standard pay and/or working conditions. In other words, part of the compensation package is "the fact that you get to develop video games". And, apparently, for some folks that's worth a non-insignificant amount of cash.
1. Source control concepts (branch, merge, tag, revision, conflict, etc.). Ideally some hands-on experience w/ the most popular options. This wasn't even touched on in my undergraduate program.
2. How to accurately scope projects and manage my time.
3. The importance of making sure you're always working on something that will help you land your next job. If that isn't the case then it's time to start looking for your next job right now.
If there were a way to objectively measure "creativity" I suspect it would also correlate (weakly) with SAT scores, since creativity typically requires a modicum of intelligence. This research suggests a rough threshold of 120 IQ to support "high-level" creativity.
"Cheating" isn't what I meant by "gaming". I meant devoting significant time to improving one's "test-taking skills" and/or specifically studying the SAT. I suspect the incidence of outright cheating on the SAT is actually pretty low. Not "zero", but fairly insignificant relative to the total number of test-takers.
SAT scores correlate closely with measured IQ, and, when taken together with high school grades, are a decent predictor of success at university. I do think that article discounts the extent to which the SAT can be "gamed", though. Of course, if you get a high score because you spent hours studying the SAT in order to get a high score then that also measures something. Maybe not intelligence, but "ambition" and "self-discipline". Which, of course, also contribute to success at university (and in the job market).
Men commit murder at a much higher rate than women. Ergo all men are murderers. Amirite? Point: you shouldn't take aggregate trends and pretend that they apply to all members of a group.
when really you just consider anyone who doubts your sincerity a douchebag
This is not accurate. There are plenty of people who disagree with me on various things and who may "doubt my sincerity" but whom I nevertheless don't consider douchebags.
Slashdot Mirror
AFAIK it was the X-32 that was killed. It competed with the X-35, which became the F-35, in the JSF competition.
I've worked in tech for about 15 years. I'm not sure I've ever worked more than 50 hours/wk for more than two weeks in a row.
Past performance on other college board tests was one of the variables they considered in their model. If family income juices standardized test scores then using past test scores means income was implicitly part of their model.
Yeah. Ability to put up with B.S. is a big part of the job qualifications. Sadly, they don't include that in the description when we recruit candidates.
Where I work it tends to mean, "ability to cope with extreme disorganization and non-existent project management, and all the inefficiency and duplicated effort that entails, without becoming murderous".
I'm basing this off the fact that I got my current job around three years ago, when I was 37, without much trouble. That and the volume of recruiting emails I get (including two from Google in the past 6 months) despite my age being pretty obvious from my LinkedIn profile.
I'm 40 and I'm pretty sure I could get a job within a couple weeks if I lost my current one tomorrow. We'll see what the landscape looks like when I'm 45.
For what it's worth I've known "old" tech workers who don't "act" old, and I've known ones who do. So even though many companies may use "culture fit" as coded language for "too old" (or "too foreign"), there is still some truth to it. I've had to work with someone who acted like a grouchy old man and it wasn't enjoyable.
Can't just be the recruiters. Someone above them has to either be actively allowing them bring people back in who have already been rejected three times before or they're just so disorganized they don't keep records on that kind of thing. Given who we're talking about that seems less likely, but you never know. I can see maybe bringing someone in a second time if the first on-site interview is a "near miss", but four times? That's just weird.
Conservatively, let's say we could earn 2.5% annually in real terms (i.e. after inflation) on $10B. That's the rate the economy is projected to grow at long-term. So, $250M/year in perpetuity. That'd fund a lot of basic research, if that's what you're into.
I'd also feel better about spending $10B on a manned moon mission if the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio wasn't about 70% higher than it was 8 years ago.
Not, apparently, the folks at Google.
...shouldn't it be subconscious biases and not unconscious?
So he's like most #gamergate folks. Got it.
Seems like this could be built into compilers. What am I missing?
Specific areas that are experiencing population and/or economic growth will probably still need new roads, even if the rest of Iowa doesn't.
...is that the stuff they're filtering doesn't cover the biggest sins stemming from Facebook. Those being pride and envy.
..."the candidate who is nutters and will definitely not get my vote."
"Passion for the craft" is why they get paid less and have crappy working conditions. Because they're committed to being a video game developer. There's a certain cool factor that motivates some devs to continue to work in that industry despite sub-standard pay and/or working conditions. In other words, part of the compensation package is "the fact that you get to develop video games". And, apparently, for some folks that's worth a non-insignificant amount of cash.
Battery life and wider coverage are more important (to me) than higher bandwidth.
Things I wish I'd known, in no particular order:
1. Source control concepts (branch, merge, tag, revision, conflict, etc.). Ideally some hands-on experience w/ the most popular options. This wasn't even touched on in my undergraduate program.
2. How to accurately scope projects and manage my time.
3. The importance of making sure you're always working on something that will help you land your next job. If that isn't the case then it's time to start looking for your next job right now.
If there were a way to objectively measure "creativity" I suspect it would also correlate (weakly) with SAT scores, since creativity typically requires a modicum of intelligence. This research suggests a rough threshold of 120 IQ to support "high-level" creativity.
"Cheating" isn't what I meant by "gaming". I meant devoting significant time to improving one's "test-taking skills" and/or specifically studying the SAT. I suspect the incidence of outright cheating on the SAT is actually pretty low. Not "zero", but fairly insignificant relative to the total number of test-takers.
Disagree.
SAT scores correlate closely with measured IQ, and, when taken together with high school grades, are a decent predictor of success at university. I do think that article discounts the extent to which the SAT can be "gamed", though. Of course, if you get a high score because you spent hours studying the SAT in order to get a high score then that also measures something. Maybe not intelligence, but "ambition" and "self-discipline". Which, of course, also contribute to success at university (and in the job market).
Men commit murder at a much higher rate than women. Ergo all men are murderers. Amirite? Point: you shouldn't take aggregate trends and pretend that they apply to all members of a group.
This is not accurate. There are plenty of people who disagree with me on various things and who may "doubt my sincerity" but whom I nevertheless don't consider douchebags.