News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

ricardoreis

I don't know what the reason is, but I would love to read a truly satisfactory explanation for this.

There's too many of us. And most of the good land has been taken and/or ruined.

In my case, not so much as a harsh word between us--

and yet:

Still pretty happy to be rid of her.

Re:You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements” on Wednesday November 28, 2018 @11:52AM (#18553120)
Maybe they wanted an easy way to tell people no.

Either way -- in tech (and for some reason more so than in other industries) -- when it comes to hiring, it's head games all up and down. And generally to an extent far more than can really be called "necessary".

Re:Richard Stallman: We Can Do Better Than Bitcoin on Monday November 26, 2018 @06:31AM (#18532572)
If you look at another perspective though, of people whose economies are collapsing, or people living under authoritarian regimes, it serves a need.

Or in a broader sense: "De-regulated money transfer of any kind" -- for which the costs and risks of a cryptocurrency transaction are an acceptable tradeoff.

But for vanilla payments -- apparently they aren't (and never will be).

Re:Richard Stallman: We Can Do Better Than Bitcoin on Monday November 26, 2018 @06:26AM (#18532553)
So the question was: "What problem does X solve?"

And your answer is: "Well, problem Y. Except it doesn't solve it."

Or am I missing something?

This article indicts Amazon of the following cruelties:

It seems we were reading different articles, then. In any case your synopsis provides a very skewed representation of what the article actually said.

Re:The Art of Job Interviewing on Thursday November 22, 2018 @05:13PM (#18512915)
Am I being too difficult?

Nothing of the sort. Hopefully you'll stick to your guns.

Re:Why Aren't There C Conferences? on Thursday November 22, 2018 @05:58AM (#18509234)
Because it's a perfect language. And hence there's no need to improve (or whine and moan) about it. Which is what language conferences are normally for.
TODO: write a counter-compiler that recognizes resumes based on the stylistic "improvements" suggested by this tool - and mark them for rejection accordingly.
Well, yeah. And they should probably be having discussions based on something beside snarky retorts and popcorn-throwing too, I guess.

But I guess those discussions will need to happen elsewhere.

A NYC Subway that’s 40% worse than it was 10 years ago is still by far the best transit system in North America.

But compared to just about any major city in Europe... seriously, it's almost a joke.

That's fine - non-quantitative (a.k.a. "gut") reasoning is a valid and useful cognitive tool (in certain contexts), in fact.

If I was to give a "gut" estimate for the overall deterioration of the subway service in recent years, though -- I'd peg it at closer to 30 or 40 percent than merely 20.

except start-up cost

Which is, well, hugely significant when you think about it.

No one would consider suggesting it as a "replacement" for surface transport.

However, it is a valuable augment to the surface system. The point is that it helps "connect the dots" (providing more options for people to get from A to B) - hence making the system more effective as a whole.

Hence why the NYC mayor is so intent on funding worthless ferries;

Worthless? The ferries are one of the few unequivocally positive things to have happened to the city in recent decades.

Agreed - I don't need numbers to tell me how unpleasant the daily experience of riding the subway in NYC has become.

I was merely responding to someone else who brought up a numbers-based argument only to find out that they... apparently don't have any.

Numbers, please. (That's what "metric" means, btw).
Thanks very much for the link.

But eyeballing that chart suggests an average deterioration significantly worse than 20 percent.

A NYC Subway that's 20% worse than it was 10 years ago

By what metric?

Apparently the commenter isn't much of a city person, and may have overreacted a bit.

But they shouldn't have been downvoted for expressing that sentiment.

Re:Coding Interview Preparation Bootcamp on Monday November 19, 2018 @09:47AM (#18486738)
10 years ago I was asked how to tell if an integer is divisible by two without using division or modulus. What they expected was to bit mask the 1s place in the integer and check for equality with 0.

Wait, it gets better. I was asked the "divisible by two" question and gave the standard bitmasking technique in response. But then my interviewer said that wasn't "allowed" either, because apparently this programming environment they do their daily work in (this was an old-school web development shop basically) doesn't support basic math operations of any kind except equality, plus and minus.

He then pressed me for something "even simpler", "perhaps using function calls". Then I figured out what the "right" answer was -- he wanted be to test for odd- or even-ness recursively by, well, you know how.

So after reminding him about the obvious performance drawbacks of such an approach, I asked him -- "So do you actually write code like this in production?"

To which his answer was: "No, but I do during interviews".

Re:Don’t work “remotely” on Monday November 19, 2018 @09:35AM (#18486633)
No, it isn't simply bad or unworkable. It's a tradeoff, with both positive and negative aspects to consider.
Re:Coding Interview Preparation Bootcamp on Monday November 19, 2018 @09:25AM (#18486570)
FizzBuzz is just an icon, of course. And by itself not such a bad filter - even if it's just basically a test of memorization (a lot people actually can't remember a simple trick like that, or can't be bothered to see the importance of it).

The only problem is... at some point the tech industry basically started saying to itself, "That worked pretty well! Now if we can just make our tests 50 times harder the must be... 50 times as good!"

Which explains a lot about the situation we're in now.

Re:The New York Hustle of Amazon’s Second Headquarters on Monday November 19, 2018 @06:30AM (#18485645)
its more than a little immature to accuse this of those who disagree with you

Indeed. Especially when those who are quick to accuse others of not doing the math themselves are not... really doing the math.

Re:Coding Interview Preparation Bootcamp on Monday November 19, 2018 @06:16AM (#18485600)
You've nailed the psychological and intellectual rot at the heart of the tech interviewing craze quite eloquently. Thank you.
Would you be looking for the solution where you subtract every number in the array from 5050?

Unless they can swear up and down that what they actually do at this company, for at least a significant part of the day, is throw each other against the wall (er umm, whiteboard) and insist that they solve problems like these (and do so elegantly) within 10 minutes or less...

... or get fired ...

... then what I'll be looking for is simply -- the door.

Here are some of the popular array-based coding interview questions for your practice:

How do you find the missing number in a given integer array of 1 to 100? (solution) [1]

How do you land a job at "startups like Uber and Netflix; big organizations like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google; and service-based companies like Infosys or Luxsoft"?

Easy - by rote memorization. And a healthy sense that it's to best not question the basic idiocy behind cargo-cult interview tactics like these.

Because apparently genuinely useful critical thinking skills -- beyond such trivial matters such as how to get a better space-time tradeoff on that petabyte-scale fibanocci generator[2] our customer desperately needs you to design a viable POC for right now, on the whiteboard, before lunch -- basically aren't needed at these companies.

Notes:

[1] You think I'm just being snarky? It's famously common out in hedgefund-land for people to get hired more or less on the basis of being able to whip out a deadpan response to "gee-whiz" questions like these. And to get "flushed" for their inability to do the same. Startups aren't quite so naively reliant on shibboleth questions of this sort -- but but only slightly so.

[2] I'm being slightly hyperbolic with this example -- but only slightly. I've long since lost count of the number of times been asked "design" questions really only slightly more ridiculous than this example. And as a matter of fact I've been asked an "advanced fibanocci" question -- and apparently received a job offer to a large extent on the basis of my ability to "nail" it -- quite recently

Older »