Hey programmers, we need to talk (2013)

Re:Hey programmers, we need to talk (2013) by jackyinger on Saturday June 17, 2017 @09:57PM (#14578593)

To me it's pretty clear that the 'Internet points' we collect on HN or elsewhere are fluf. You are probably not going to get a job for having karma.

On the other hand tricky patches generally go into a git or some VCS, that you can point to and impress prospective employers with.

If there's any confusion regarding this it's the user's error.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hey programmers, we need to talk (2013) by theparanoid on Saturday June 17, 2017 @11:28PM (#14578819)

When applying for consulting gigs people have looked (sometimes closely) at my Open Source patches/commits.

Recruiters never ever look at patches/commits. They might read the bottom of a resume's first page.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hey programmers, we need to talk (2013) by z1mm32m4n on Saturday June 17, 2017 @11:43PM (#14578857)

> If there's any confusion regarding this it's the user's error.

And the article's point is that we should be designing systems that make it even harder for the users to make that error. It's the difference between

- a poorly-designed service that rewards people for contributing little real value to the world, and

- a well-designed service that rewards people proportional to the value they create

While it's true that the error is the user's, we stand to benefit from ensuring that other users don't make those errors in the first place.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Hey programmers, we need to talk (2013) by ruleabidinguser on Sunday June 18, 2017 @12:30AM (#14578976)

Go ahead, design your service that dictates how a user should structure their life. I hope you won't be surprised when you don't have any users.

[ Parent | on HN ]