vpalanc1
> Sadly, you can't set the value of an index in an array like that in the top level in C, only inside functions.
This is not exactly true. An assignment is a value, you can do e.g.
int a = b[x] = 0;
(which implies that you can do your array-index assignments at the global level by creating nonsensical/unused variables and initializing them).
My current employer, when hiring me, said "Have you ever looked at the Firefox codebase? No? Good. Here, take this Firefox bug. Fix it by Monday, or at least analyze the root cause, and let's talk about it during the interview".
Needless to say, they had no interest in Firefox per se. It was just a cool open-source project, and a good way to give me "actual work" while making it plainly obvious that it wasn't for their own benefit/ they weren't looking for "free code via tech interviews"
That's still 1.6-5.3 times more than they used to be, according to the original claim. Seems less dramatic than 5-10x but for an apartment that already feels tiny, it's a lot.
Is that really a thing in the US? Honest question, I'm confused. The justification for requiring 20% tips (and considering you "nasty" if you leave any less) is that the waiters in the US are not even paid minimum wage, they rely on the customer tips to make a living. So, which one is it? If they rely on the tips, surely they don't cost the restaurant owners any significant amount of $$, do they?
Like - US for a very long while didn't use chip & PIN - but it was simple to deny the transactions and as a consumer you were somewhat well protected, despite lax security. But this generates large costs, and perversely, the cost/uncertainty affects the small businesses the most.
Yes, when I use 3DSecure for an online transaction, the bank shifts the burden of proof to me (a correctly-authorized 2-factor transaction cannot be simply challenged with a complaint at the bank, I have to prove that it wasn't me). Still, it's hard to argue that 2-factor for online transactions is consumer-unfriendly, even if the consumer loses the deniability
If you're using funnel analytics to decide that the product is broken - i'd say you probably do something wrong.
My point is that if I didn't actually do anything to deceive you into giving me money (like, I didn't claim that I have a millionaire father who's going to give you the money in case I lose at blackjack) - then it's not really deception on my part; it's just error and/or poor judgement on your part for handing me the money.
The one who first names the price forms the baseline of negotiation. Say their range is 100-140k. If you say, "tell me what you would pay" and they say 100K, you're screwed, no way you can say "150k" from there and still be taken seriously. If OTOH you say 150k at the start and are lucky enough to get the answer "no way we can give you more than 140k", from there it's a simple job of asking for an extra concession that you know they can make ("Hmm... ok, say I could accept 140k, but only if the company allows me to WFH when I need to")
( *) Of course, not from the start. He's right about that. They need to be invested in the hiring - if they already spent a lot of effort trying to assess your skill before making an offer, you're in a much better position to ask a lot. Presuming that they like you, of course.
People, in general, don't want to be rich. They want to be happy. Programmers are a happy bunch, when you look at them in aggregate, and compare with other categories of professionals. They are happy to give away enormous quantities of their labour. They spread "egalitarian myths" because they are happy with their lifestyle, and want others to join in. Because they are so confident, that they don't feel they need monopolies to protect or improve their lifestyle.
You are making a fundamentally flawed assumption that programmers are not "smart enough to unionise". What if they are smart enough NOT TO unionise? What if they actually know better than you think they do?
Never assume you know better how one should live his/her life.