Fine, but when you go to GOOGLE and search for MAPS...don't piss and moan when the first result that comes up is Google Maps. Not only are they the most popular mapping service by a mile, but it is owned and promoted by GOOGLE...the search engine you are using at the time. Of course Google is going to put a little map in your results and say "Hey, we've got this map service...".
This was a very bad example.
go to bing and search for maps... you get google maps
go to duckduckgo and search for maps, and you get google maps
go to goole and search for maps, and you get google maps, WITH no indication that google is saying "hey we have a map service"
As far as "using it as an address bar" what if I'm using chrome? My address and search bar are one and the same
A lot of companies use coding tests as part of the interview process and pretty much there will be some time limit, whether stated or not.
I wish more candidates would figure that out. I'm always surprised when I get a candidate who asks me if there is a time limit... Well it is a one hour interview, what do you think?
A senior software engineer will not be significantly better than a junior one at solving trivial problems.
That isn't relevant. But a senior software engineer should be able to solve the trivial problems. IF they can't don't hire them. IF they can, then ask them to do something relevant to the added value.
If you want to interview a senior level person, (especially for their "added value") the question is probably going to be a bit more complicated. Rather than spend an hour on a complicated question, that this guy can't solve. Spend five minutes weeding him out on a simple question.
Tests are just stupid. Use real-world experience for evaluation.
Tests are not stupid. The test that is being talked about isn't about evaluating someone for employment, it is about evaluating someone to CONTINUE the interview.
Ignoring the fact that using real-world experience is nearly impossible in a 45 minute phone conversation, or even a half day of interviews. The problem is a ton of people can't code. Even when they think they can. You don't hire someone because they can do fizzbuzz, but you normally don't bother interviewing someone who can't do fizzbuzz.
Except your interview only shows he's at the BSc level, which doesn't say much at all.
Actually it says a LOT. The thing is MOST candidates are NOT at that level. So it tells us, this candidate is worth interviewing more thoroughly. And that is very important.
Are you saying a senior engineer shouldn't bother to know this undergraduate level stuff?
That is kind of like saying you are a mathematician, but you won't bother with anyone who asks you to add 2 and 2
Perhaps you think actually writing code is beneath you. And maybe you have your junior coders doing this kind of grunt work. But how do you know if they are doing it right?
Fail as in, unable to complete the task. Not just get the idea down, not just give me some psuedocode that comes close to working. But outright fail.
Sure you might come in say "Hey I don't remember the exact print syntax, so I'll just wave my hands and pretend 'printfoobar' works this way" To me that is fine. It gets the point across, and I'm assuming you will be smart enough to look up the exact syntax later... But did you get a loop? Did you cover the corner cases? Did you try to test your code?
I'm amazed at people who write some code, and then immediately look up at me and say "yep that should work." It doesn't even generate the one example I gave them, let alone a general case. That kind of fail.
In JavaScript, without using the reverse() method, reverse an array of numbers containing 1,2,3,4,5 in the most efficient way possible.
Semi-off topic question: really? I mean, are we (programming job seekers) as a group that dumb?
Yes. Actually I'd say probably even dumber than that. It doesn't really seem to matter if the person is graduating from school (with a 4.0) or has several years of experience. The number of people who can't code, even the simplest things is absolutely amazing.
I used to interview students on campus. I asked them to write strcmp. Granted more and more people are learning languages where you don't really need to write strcmp, but you should be able to figure it out. I am always amazed at the number of people who don't even seem to understand. Its like they've never even looked up a word in a dictionary.
The really sad thing is, I knew many of the people I interviewed would probably go out and get jobs in the field, with other companies... I no longer wonder why so much software sucks.
Well you typically have two jobs as a developer. One is to write code, the other is to SOLVE PROBLEMS. You are typically given a SIMPLE problem to solve. If you can't solve that simple problem in a short time, how will you be able to solve more complicated problems?
In addition it shows the interviewer that you do know a bit about coding.
But bringing in some random snippets of code, that probably someone else wrote?
The problems with copyright are obvious. We now have a system where copyrights almost never expire anymore.
As far as I'm concerned, copyrights are unlimited. A copyright will NOT expire within your lifetime, they currently barely expire within TWO lifetimes. I can't believe this is what the "for a limited time" means. A limited time should be within a lifetime. I don't know the exact time, 14 years? 28 years? I don't know. But something less than 75 years.
You do know you can vote for ANYONE. In 12 years vote Khanna for President. For those in MA write him in has a Rep or Senator next time you vote.
And people need to stop voting for one party or the other, vote for one of the other dozen parties.
Someone writes an article claiming our tools are lacking, and your first impression is to give them something complicated?
I'm not sure why you are singling out Linux or MacOs, but CLIs have been around for a long time... and they are DIFFICULT to use, its why not many people use them. Is it powerful? Sure. But that doesn't mean it is easy. And that was the point of the article. simplicity.
Why do you think most of what the average Joe wants is some simple text parsing?
And you are recommending sed, awk, and PERL to beginners? Do you want to scar them for life?
There is a far cry between "basic computer literacy" and programming. One can (and MANY have) learn basic computer literacy, without ever even knowing programming exists. I'm also going to guess that for the most part, by the time a kid gets around to learning about programming, they already have that "basic computer literacy".
A programmer is someone who writes computer programs; any stricter definition is just elitism. If you can come up with (not just copy)
10 print "hello world"
20 goto 10
, you're a programmer, even though you're just a beginner.
A programmer is someone who writes computer programs. Not someone who once upon a time wrote hello world. And it is impossible to come up with hello world, without copying it. That is like saying, someone who once placed a single brick is now a brick layer. No, they aren't.
While I agree that it is worthwhile to _expose_ as many people as possible to programming
Why is it worthwhile to expose people to programming? I think you should give me people a chance to learn it, but it isn't necessary to expose them to it. Knowing how to program isn't going to really help you in any other profession. Knowing some logic would help, but then you can just learn logic.
There are lots of profession that it might be useful to expose to people, but there is only so much time.
And again, you're not allowing people to be non-experts.
Not everybody can architect a house. Almost everyone can learn enough in a day to build a garden wall.
No, no they can not. A LOT of people can learn to build a garden wall, and some can learn it in a day. But some people can't. And THAT is simple. Programming is difficult. VERY difficult. Sure a lot of people can learn it. But some people never will. They just don't get the concepts.
Someone pointed out "everyone of us" can do X... And they are wrong. Some people can't follow a list, some people can't follow directions, let alone create directions. Could they do with practice? Perhaps. But they don't want to. They don't need to.
No... What he is saying, is when you have a lot of choices, chances are you'll find a choice that meets your criteria (yeah!). But when there aren't a lot of choices, you'll settle for something that doesn't meet your criteria (boo). DUH.... BUT he claims that, you sometimes find a hidden gem, when settling for something outside your criteria.
This is a big reason. When the ebook price is the same, or more than the mass market paperback, there isn't much of an incentive to pay the higher price. I don't even bother buying either book now. I've been reading mostly free classics, or indie authors. Perhaps has the dust clears from the price fixing law suit, and publishers get their heads out of their asses, I might start purchasing their product again.
I like my kindle, But books not needing batteries, is not a lame argument. Books can be read at the beginning and end of flights. And while a kindle will last a while, you said it yourself, you might forget or can't find the charger.
Amazon is the only store place to buy. It charges huge commissions,
Amazon isn't the only place, it is the easiest. But you can purchase from other ebook sellers. As far as the pricing, blame the publishers, not Amazon.
Slashdot Mirror
Fine, but when you go to GOOGLE and search for MAPS...don't piss and moan when the first result that comes up is Google Maps. Not only are they the most popular mapping service by a mile, but it is owned and promoted by GOOGLE...the search engine you are using at the time. Of course Google is going to put a little map in your results and say "Hey, we've got this map service...".
This was a very bad example.
go to bing and search for maps... you get google maps
go to duckduckgo and search for maps, and you get google maps
go to goole and search for maps, and you get google maps, WITH no indication that google is saying "hey we have a map service"
As far as "using it as an address bar" what if I'm using chrome? My address and search bar are one and the same
A lot of companies use coding tests as part of the interview process and pretty much there will be some time limit, whether stated or not.
I wish more candidates would figure that out. I'm always surprised when I get a candidate who asks me if there is a time limit... Well it is a one hour interview, what do you think?
A senior software engineer will not be significantly better than a junior one at solving trivial problems.
That isn't relevant. But a senior software engineer should be able to solve the trivial problems. IF they can't don't hire them. IF they can, then ask them to do something relevant to the added value.
If you want to interview a senior level person, (especially for their "added value") the question is probably going to be a bit more complicated. Rather than spend an hour on a complicated question, that this guy can't solve. Spend five minutes weeding him out on a simple question.
Tests are just stupid. Use real-world experience for evaluation.
Tests are not stupid. The test that is being talked about isn't about evaluating someone for employment, it is about evaluating someone to CONTINUE the interview.
Ignoring the fact that using real-world experience is nearly impossible in a 45 minute phone conversation, or even a half day of interviews. The problem is a ton of people can't code. Even when they think they can. You don't hire someone because they can do fizzbuzz, but you normally don't bother interviewing someone who can't do fizzbuzz.
Except your interview only shows he's at the BSc level, which doesn't say much at all.
Actually it says a LOT. The thing is MOST candidates are NOT at that level. So it tells us, this candidate is worth interviewing more thoroughly. And that is very important.
Are you saying a senior engineer shouldn't bother to know this undergraduate level stuff?
That is kind of like saying you are a mathematician, but you won't bother with anyone who asks you to add 2 and 2
Perhaps you think actually writing code is beneath you. And maybe you have your junior coders doing this kind of grunt work. But how do you know if they are doing it right?
Fail as in, unable to complete the task. Not just get the idea down, not just give me some psuedocode that comes close to working. But outright fail.
Sure you might come in say "Hey I don't remember the exact print syntax, so I'll just wave my hands and pretend 'printfoobar' works this way" To me that is fine. It gets the point across, and I'm assuming you will be smart enough to look up the exact syntax later... But did you get a loop? Did you cover the corner cases? Did you try to test your code?
I'm amazed at people who write some code, and then immediately look up at me and say "yep that should work." It doesn't even generate the one example I gave them, let alone a general case. That kind of fail.
In JavaScript, without using the reverse() method, reverse an array of numbers containing 1,2,3,4,5 in the most efficient way possible.
Semi-off topic question: really? I mean, are we (programming job seekers) as a group that dumb?
Yes. Actually I'd say probably even dumber than that. It doesn't really seem to matter if the person is graduating from school (with a 4.0) or has several years of experience. The number of people who can't code, even the simplest things is absolutely amazing.
I used to interview students on campus. I asked them to write strcmp. Granted more and more people are learning languages where you don't really need to write strcmp, but you should be able to figure it out. I am always amazed at the number of people who don't even seem to understand. Its like they've never even looked up a word in a dictionary.
The really sad thing is, I knew many of the people I interviewed would probably go out and get jobs in the field, with other companies... I no longer wonder why so much software sucks.
Well you typically have two jobs as a developer. One is to write code, the other is to SOLVE PROBLEMS. You are typically given a SIMPLE problem to solve. If you can't solve that simple problem in a short time, how will you be able to solve more complicated problems?
In addition it shows the interviewer that you do know a bit about coding.
But bringing in some random snippets of code, that probably someone else wrote?
The problems with copyright are obvious. We now have a system where copyrights almost never expire anymore.
As far as I'm concerned, copyrights are unlimited. A copyright will NOT expire within your lifetime, they currently barely expire within TWO lifetimes. I can't believe this is what the "for a limited time" means. A limited time should be within a lifetime. I don't know the exact time, 14 years? 28 years? I don't know. But something less than 75 years.
You do know you can vote for ANYONE. In 12 years vote Khanna for President. For those in MA write him in has a Rep or Senator next time you vote.
And people need to stop voting for one party or the other, vote for one of the other dozen parties.
Someone writes an article claiming our tools are lacking, and your first impression is to give them something complicated?
I'm not sure why you are singling out Linux or MacOs, but CLIs have been around for a long time... and they are DIFFICULT to use, its why not many people use them. Is it powerful? Sure. But that doesn't mean it is easy. And that was the point of the article. simplicity.
Why do you think most of what the average Joe wants is some simple text parsing?
And you are recommending sed, awk, and PERL to beginners? Do you want to scar them for life?
There is a far cry between "basic computer literacy" and programming. One can (and MANY have) learn basic computer literacy, without ever even knowing programming exists. I'm also going to guess that for the most part, by the time a kid gets around to learning about programming, they already have that "basic computer literacy".
A programmer is someone who writes computer programs; any stricter definition is just elitism. If you can come up with (not just copy) 10 print "hello world" 20 goto 10 , you're a programmer, even though you're just a beginner.
A programmer is someone who writes computer programs. Not someone who once upon a time wrote hello world. And it is impossible to come up with hello world, without copying it. That is like saying, someone who once placed a single brick is now a brick layer. No, they aren't.
While I agree that it is worthwhile to _expose_ as many people as possible to programming
Why is it worthwhile to expose people to programming? I think you should give me people a chance to learn it, but it isn't necessary to expose them to it. Knowing how to program isn't going to really help you in any other profession. Knowing some logic would help, but then you can just learn logic.
There are lots of profession that it might be useful to expose to people, but there is only so much time.
And again, you're not allowing people to be non-experts.
Not everybody can architect a house. Almost everyone can learn enough in a day to build a garden wall.
No, no they can not. A LOT of people can learn to build a garden wall, and some can learn it in a day. But some people can't. And THAT is simple. Programming is difficult. VERY difficult. Sure a lot of people can learn it. But some people never will. They just don't get the concepts.
Someone pointed out "everyone of us" can do X... And they are wrong. Some people can't follow a list, some people can't follow directions, let alone create directions. Could they do with practice? Perhaps. But they don't want to. They don't need to.
No... What he is saying, is when you have a lot of choices, chances are you'll find a choice that meets your criteria (yeah!). But when there aren't a lot of choices, you'll settle for something that doesn't meet your criteria (boo). DUH.... BUT he claims that, you sometimes find a hidden gem, when settling for something outside your criteria.
Why does it cost so little to build, and yet so much (relatively) to maintain? Just over 100K to built, and almost 50K annually to maintain?
This is a big reason. When the ebook price is the same, or more than the mass market paperback, there isn't much of an incentive to pay the higher price. I don't even bother buying either book now. I've been reading mostly free classics, or indie authors. Perhaps has the dust clears from the price fixing law suit, and publishers get their heads out of their asses, I might start purchasing their product again.
I like my kindle, But books not needing batteries, is not a lame argument. Books can be read at the beginning and end of flights. And while a kindle will last a while, you said it yourself, you might forget or can't find the charger.
While an e-book is technically the same thing, content wise, the *experience* of reading a book is something that cannot be duplicated.
I agree, I'm disappointed in my ebook as I no longer have to hold the book open. The pages don't flip closed on me. My backpack/suitcase is lighter.
Amazon is the only store place to buy. It charges huge commissions,
Amazon isn't the only place, it is the easiest. But you can purchase from other ebook sellers. As far as the pricing, blame the publishers, not Amazon.
What does providing it to the public have to do with anything? Just because I can't, or won't sell something, doesn't men I can't copyright it.
Id like to see their ample evidence. But I like how they list a half dozen potential causes, but only plan on doing something about one of them.