The problem is a growing psychological behavior where people tend to select the option that fits their brain decision patterns. I'm not a neuroscientist, so I don't have the correct term for this. But it's the same mentality that compels people (in the US, statistically older, less educated) to agree with a certain anti-scientific answer. Basically it's the behavior that causes people to reject published science for peer-shared hoaxes and, dare I use the horrid term, "fake news".
All youtube does is deliver video content (ignoring their censorship responsibilities or actions). Point is, trolls or people will ill intent or just simply morons publish videos of disinformation, and unfortunately simple-minded people latch on to those ideas - especially if they think their enemies (elitist educated (liberals)) believe in the opposing ideas).
This is about egos. The Rails ecosystem is rife with developers who think they are gods. They surround themselves with people who have similar inflated egos, further reinforcing their group behaviors. It probably has something to do with DHH being the leader, in stark contrast to the humble Matz who really made it all possible with the elegant, powerful language.
I've been a Rails dev for 5 years, and I've encountered way too much of this during the times I've been looking for work. The irony is, many of these guys (and they're almost all guys) are so rabid that they cannot consider anything other than pair, TDD, Rails, mostly Mac, and Github. "Show us your Github!"
We need a term for these guys, something on par with "brogrammer" but specific to their unique, incestuous behaviors.
They might become suspicious if they never saw any replies, so perhaps put all the banned folks in a group so they could spam each other. That would cause them extra angst, seeing only competitors replying.
There's more and more research about the benefits of standing - or rather, the harm that comes from sitting.
I started standing for work four years ago. Only the first couple of weeks were challenging, but I quickly became able to stand for 12+ hours non stop. Granted, I don't stand like a statue; I shift around (but not so much that I look like some freak).
Within a week of changing from sitting to standing, my lower back problems went away. Those lower back problems developed despite my proper ergonomic arrangement in the number of Herman Miller Aeron chairs I had for the previous decade.
Lastly, if you frequently get pulled away from your desk, having to stand up and sit down is a real nuisance. When you work standing, it's as simple as walking to and from your desk.
I don't know any _real_ telecommuters, at least not developers, who would ever be compelled to click on anything related to CareerBuilder. Thus, this survey obviously only attracted monkeys. Worse yet, it is/will be picked up by news sites and used to dissuade companies from considering allowing workers to work remotely.
I say this survey was entirely bunk and unscientific. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the results weren't purely made up by a hungry "writer".
That's a nice idea, but since the US practically revolves around the stock market, Steve Jobs' health is of utmost concern to "the powers that be".
If our economy wasn't so utterly leveraged against play money, the man could have some peace. Not "The Man", mind you, but the man. And hell, "The People" could have better peace too I'm sure.
Markus is a spoiled, rich crybaby. He's made so much money off that hideous site for so many years (and boasted about it for ages on his blog)... you would think he could afford proper security audits and support to close holes.
Basically he's been sitting on his ass technically for nearly the entire time, and now he's pissy because his lack of attention bit him.
And for the record, OkCupid.com is so immeasurably better than PoF in every way, it's time for the old whale to die.
I find it a subtle, tasteful improvement. There's just enough change to be fresh without losing its brand or feel. Also I find it more spacious and cleaner.
I won't bother speculating why C++ became dominant (any more than I feel like rehashing VHS vs BetaMax), but I will say this: any language that needs a series of books explaining how NOT to use the language (lest you create obscure bugs) is an inherently flawed language.
With assembly there's an excuse - you have no boundaries (no pun intended). You realize you're operating on bare metal, or at least one step above it. But with C++ you have this belief that you have the illusion of power and safety, but the reality is you have a jumble of constructs and tools that can easily be used wrong (and often are by novices and intermediate developers).
I daresay you could teach an intermediate coder how to do OO in straight C and get better results than if they were trying to use C++.
And yeah, I'm in the camp of "Obj-C is better than C++". But then, I like Ruby, Lisp, Clojure, and Scala too. C++ really needs to die. Any further energy spent on C++ needs instead to be put into JVM and other abstraction technologies.
The companies never really figure out what's going on. Your lead or immediate project manager may have a clue, but their management (all the way to the top) just doesn't get it.
Ironically, the argument for the huge CEO bonuses, even during the bailouts, was that "we have to pay this much to retain our 'talent'" (talent being the executives who brought the disasters upon these companies).
Face it. US styled (quarterly earnings per share centric) capitalism simply doesn't work long term.
Get the kid off the computer and out in the real world.
Sign him up for martial arts, an indoor climbing club (even non-athletic people can do this), take him hiking.
It's easy, at any point in one's life, to sit down and focus on learning something technical (even though you do have to start very simple). However, it's much harder to become active and social later in life without starting early.
You think finding a job is hard now, when you have no experience. It can be as hard or harder once you DO have experience. Before I drone on about why it's hard to get a job with experience, here's my solution to both: Human Networking.
It's really surprisingly simple. The more people you talk to and get to know...
- the more people who may tell you when a position becomes (or is about to become) available - the more people you can "seek advice" from about getting a job (thereby making them aware of your availability, skills, and interests) - the more you can name-drop, or at least make reference to first hand - the more you can hear and learn about what companies are like to work for, and whether you would really want to work there or not
I'm sure there are other benefits, but the first two listed are probably the most valuable.
So how do you meet these people? In the old days, pre-internet, people tended to congregate in different groups or clubs (Toastmasters being one of the popular ones). Now we have Meetup, which might have some active groups you can visit and get in with. There are also community groups, such as those focused on bringing and operating business within a community, volunteer groups, etc.
You can't really discount groups as not being applicable or beneficial until you get in and get to know people. Everyone knows someone, and people, in person, tend to be happy and willing to direct and guide others. So the guy you're volunteering with at Habitat for Humanity may have some great contacts in your field. At the very least he may have a contact that he knows has lots of tech contacts; and you're +1 already because you know this guy, and because you're doing meaningful volunteer work.
Lastly, seeing the internet as the primary tool for getting a job is a huge mistake. The internet, where jobs are concerned (and some other things), is a cesspool. Multiple posts for the same job, multiple "staffing firms" trying to fill the same spot (and using recruiters who previously were just somewhat non-technical, but now who are imported and often merely trained monkeys); positions which have been pulled or filled, but no updates/removals of the internet posts have been made; etc. etc.
Meanwhile, find something of interest, technical or otherwise (you never know where your good connection is going to come from), and get involved. If ballroom dancing is your fancy, go do that. Those people know people.
Now about the experienced seeking jobs... just be aware that so many jobs today are for positions that already existed. Bob did X, Y, and Z, and company is seeking someone with those exact skills. It's pretty unlikely that there are candidates with the exact skills required; thus it's very beneficial to know someone within the company, that way you can get the interview without being filtered out by a keyword-matching monkey.
Now that users can do almost anything (simple) on a computer or even their phone, they now expect that anything they can imagine (vaguely, inarticulately, even impossibly) should be easy to do.
Unless you're at one of the rare shops that's well funded and not directly dealing with users, you will likely be in a no-win position.
Deliver a flawless system and you go unnoticed. Instead, you get asked "can it do this ?"
Or worse and most likely, you step into a position with an existing product that you have to continue development of. It will be behind schedule, over budget, and a complete architectural disaster. What's more, it won't match what the users need because nobody bothered to dig deeply to find out what the users really needed (as opposed to what they initially said they wanted - there's a huge difference).
Am I bitter, yes. I'd rather be a lawyer. At least then I'd still be getting rich doing crap work.
What you describe does not surprise me, and in fact much of the blame does go all the way up the US management chain.
Ultimately the US business game is about quarterly earnings per share, and using stupid tactics like these help boost those numbers temporarily. Of course in the long run overall performance of the company suffers (and along the way, Americans have fewer job opportunities).
My personal experience with outsourcing people is that they simply cannot think outside the box. In fact, they cannot think beyond explicit instructions. For the level of energy it takes to adequately instruct an offshore worker, we can do the work ourselves. This is especially true with the more agile languages and toolkits these days.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is a growing psychological behavior where people tend to select the option that fits their brain decision patterns. I'm not a neuroscientist, so I don't have the correct term for this. But it's the same mentality that compels people (in the US, statistically older, less educated) to agree with a certain anti-scientific answer. Basically it's the behavior that causes people to reject published science for peer-shared hoaxes and, dare I use the horrid term, "fake news".
All youtube does is deliver video content (ignoring their censorship responsibilities or actions). Point is, trolls or people will ill intent or just simply morons publish videos of disinformation, and unfortunately simple-minded people latch on to those ideas - especially if they think their enemies (elitist educated (liberals)) believe in the opposing ideas).
Or they could just build a monolithic dome for an 8% premium and get all the benefits and more.
This is about egos. The Rails ecosystem is rife with developers who think they are gods. They surround themselves with people who have similar inflated egos, further reinforcing their group behaviors. It probably has something to do with DHH being the leader, in stark contrast to the humble Matz who really made it all possible with the elegant, powerful language.
I've been a Rails dev for 5 years, and I've encountered way too much of this during the times I've been looking for work. The irony is, many of these guys (and they're almost all guys) are so rabid that they cannot consider anything other than pair, TDD, Rails, mostly Mac, and Github. "Show us your Github!"
We need a term for these guys, something on par with "brogrammer" but specific to their unique, incestuous behaviors.
They might become suspicious if they never saw any replies, so perhaps put all the banned folks in a group so they could spam each other. That would cause them extra angst, seeing only competitors replying.
There's more and more research about the benefits of standing - or rather, the harm that comes from sitting.
I started standing for work four years ago. Only the first couple of weeks were challenging, but I quickly became able to stand for 12+ hours non stop. Granted, I don't stand like a statue; I shift around (but not so much that I look like some freak).
Within a week of changing from sitting to standing, my lower back problems went away. Those lower back problems developed despite my proper ergonomic arrangement in the number of Herman Miller Aeron chairs I had for the previous decade.
Lastly, if you frequently get pulled away from your desk, having to stand up and sit down is a real nuisance. When you work standing, it's as simple as walking to and from your desk.
I don't know any _real_ telecommuters, at least not developers, who would ever be compelled to click on anything related to CareerBuilder. Thus, this survey obviously only attracted monkeys. Worse yet, it is/will be picked up by news sites and used to dissuade companies from considering allowing workers to work remotely.
I say this survey was entirely bunk and unscientific. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the results weren't purely made up by a hungry "writer".
It's cool to sell $100 HDMI cables that people don't need, but omg if you try to sell an adapter that many of us need... well that's illegal!
Hey I've got an idea! Let's just ditch the HDMI on both ends and go mini-dp.
... spend 6 billion to make Larry Ellison's head bigger
or ... spend 10 million to remove Larry Ellison's head
From a pure business standpoint the decision is obvious.
That's a nice idea, but since the US practically revolves around the stock market, Steve Jobs' health is of utmost concern to "the powers that be".
If our economy wasn't so utterly leveraged against play money, the man could have some peace. Not "The Man", mind you, but the man. And hell, "The People" could have better peace too I'm sure.
Markus is a spoiled, rich crybaby. He's made so much money off that hideous site for so many years (and boasted about it for ages on his blog)... you would think he could afford proper security audits and support to close holes.
Basically he's been sitting on his ass technically for nearly the entire time, and now he's pissy because his lack of attention bit him.
And for the record, OkCupid.com is so immeasurably better than PoF in every way, it's time for the old whale to die.
I find it a subtle, tasteful improvement. There's just enough change to be fresh without losing its brand or feel. Also I find it more spacious and cleaner.
Cheers on the redesign!
1. No Answer
or
2. We found the problem. It wasn't our fault, and it doesn't matter because it's not happening to anyone. (lie)
Netflix.
Ok another word...
Streaming.
I won't bother speculating why C++ became dominant (any more than I feel like rehashing VHS vs BetaMax), but I will say this: any language that needs a series of books explaining how NOT to use the language (lest you create obscure bugs) is an inherently flawed language.
With assembly there's an excuse - you have no boundaries (no pun intended). You realize you're operating on bare metal, or at least one step above it. But with C++ you have this belief that you have the illusion of power and safety, but the reality is you have a jumble of constructs and tools that can easily be used wrong (and often are by novices and intermediate developers).
I daresay you could teach an intermediate coder how to do OO in straight C and get better results than if they were trying to use C++.
And yeah, I'm in the camp of "Obj-C is better than C++". But then, I like Ruby, Lisp, Clojure, and Scala too. C++ really needs to die. Any further energy spent on C++ needs instead to be put into JVM and other abstraction technologies.
"Most employers do annual pay adjustments", you say...
Source please?
The companies never really figure out what's going on. Your lead or immediate project manager may have a clue, but their management (all the way to the top) just doesn't get it.
Ironically, the argument for the huge CEO bonuses, even during the bailouts, was that "we have to pay this much to retain our 'talent'" (talent being the executives who brought the disasters upon these companies).
Face it. US styled (quarterly earnings per share centric) capitalism simply doesn't work long term.
I guess that means the US won't be in any hurry to leave now.
Get the kid off the computer and out in the real world.
Sign him up for martial arts, an indoor climbing club (even non-athletic people can do this), take him hiking.
It's easy, at any point in one's life, to sit down and focus on learning something technical (even though you do have to start very simple). However, it's much harder to become active and social later in life without starting early.
You think finding a job is hard now, when you have no experience. It can be as hard or harder once you DO have experience. Before I drone on about why it's hard to get a job with experience, here's my solution to both: Human Networking.
It's really surprisingly simple. The more people you talk to and get to know...
- the more people who may tell you when a position becomes (or is about to become) available
- the more people you can "seek advice" from about getting a job (thereby making them aware of your availability, skills, and interests)
- the more you can name-drop, or at least make reference to first hand
- the more you can hear and learn about what companies are like to work for, and whether you would really want to work there or not
I'm sure there are other benefits, but the first two listed are probably the most valuable.
So how do you meet these people? In the old days, pre-internet, people tended to congregate in different groups or clubs (Toastmasters being one of the popular ones). Now we have Meetup, which might have some active groups you can visit and get in with. There are also community groups, such as those focused on bringing and operating business within a community, volunteer groups, etc.
You can't really discount groups as not being applicable or beneficial until you get in and get to know people. Everyone knows someone, and people, in person, tend to be happy and willing to direct and guide others. So the guy you're volunteering with at Habitat for Humanity may have some great contacts in your field. At the very least he may have a contact that he knows has lots of tech contacts; and you're +1 already because you know this guy, and because you're doing meaningful volunteer work.
Lastly, seeing the internet as the primary tool for getting a job is a huge mistake. The internet, where jobs are concerned (and some other things), is a cesspool. Multiple posts for the same job, multiple "staffing firms" trying to fill the same spot (and using recruiters who previously were just somewhat non-technical, but now who are imported and often merely trained monkeys); positions which have been pulled or filled, but no updates/removals of the internet posts have been made; etc. etc.
Meanwhile, find something of interest, technical or otherwise (you never know where your good connection is going to come from), and get involved. If ballroom dancing is your fancy, go do that. Those people know people.
Now about the experienced seeking jobs... just be aware that so many jobs today are for positions that already existed. Bob did X, Y, and Z, and company is seeking someone with those exact skills. It's pretty unlikely that there are candidates with the exact skills required; thus it's very beneficial to know someone within the company, that way you can get the interview without being filtered out by a keyword-matching monkey.
Now that users can do almost anything (simple) on a computer or even their phone, they now expect that anything they can imagine (vaguely, inarticulately, even impossibly) should be easy to do.
Unless you're at one of the rare shops that's well funded and not directly dealing with users, you will likely be in a no-win position.
Deliver a flawless system and you go unnoticed. Instead, you get asked "can it do this ?"
Or worse and most likely, you step into a position with an existing product that you have to continue development of. It will be behind schedule, over budget, and a complete architectural disaster. What's more, it won't match what the users need because nobody bothered to dig deeply to find out what the users really needed (as opposed to what they initially said they wanted - there's a huge difference).
Am I bitter, yes. I'd rather be a lawyer. At least then I'd still be getting rich doing crap work.
What you describe does not surprise me, and in fact much of the blame does go all the way up the US management chain.
Ultimately the US business game is about quarterly earnings per share, and using stupid tactics like these help boost those numbers temporarily. Of course in the long run overall performance of the company suffers (and along the way, Americans have fewer job opportunities).
My personal experience with outsourcing people is that they simply cannot think outside the box. In fact, they cannot think beyond explicit instructions. For the level of energy it takes to adequately instruct an offshore worker, we can do the work ourselves. This is especially true with the more agile languages and toolkits these days.
Makes you wonder what software will break that they didn't test...
I suppose we owe thanks to the early adopters out there for testing all our updates.
Now you know why your corporate IT department is so reluctant to update software and OSs.
Now waitttthere jussh a minit...
YOu tellin me I can find da mooos with biggish breshsh in Demark or Cansas?
AN what does minishirtsh haves to do with it?
Having "baselinemag.com" open on your desktop... that may even kill any geek cred you might have had also!
18 observers is enough? Not that I necessarily disagree with the results they've gathered in this study, but the sample group seems awfully small....