nanodano

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

> C Is Not a Low-level Language Anymore

Pretty sure C was always considered a high-level language.

> Payment providers wont do business with private (personal) accounts, so you need a business bank account

Eh, I don't know where you've looked, but Stripe is one of the biggest around and you don't need a business bank account..

A couple thoughts after reading this. They aren't meant to be criticisms, just a reflection on my own experiences as well because I have had plenty of failures myself.

For one, failing is probable. Most small businesses fail. The chances that you get it right on your very first try is low. Sometimes it takes many failed business ventures before you learn all the lessons. A lot of the lessons can be learned from reading books though. The common and cliche things like "identify your target audience" and "researching competitors" and "see if there is an interest in the product" are mentioned in every book but still skipped by so many.

There is a lot of talk about the things being built and the technology, but almost no discussion about the marketing side which is arguably more important. I wonder how much effort was put into that aspect.

It sounds like there was not a lot of product/market research before building the thing. I'm guilty of this too, building a product nobody wanted because I didn't do homework first to see if anyone cared.

Some of the ideas sound like they had no passion behind them. For example, the affiliate site for selling dresses. Was that something that was inspiring, or simply an easy-way-to-make-money thing? I think that can have a huge effect in quitting or sticking with it.

And it also sounds like there was a lot of quitting too early because things weren't growing fast enough. The marketing aspect may have played a factor here, but from my experience...solo startups DO NOT grow fast. Having that expectation in the first place might have been the reason for such disappointment. Running a business is a long-term thing that could even span beyond your lifetime.

Sounds like they were unhappy working there and did not like the CEO or their management. Kind of interesting they are suing in an effort to go BACK to work there.

Something sounds really suspicious about this offer. How does a company afford to pay people 3k/month without anything in return? They're paying 3k/month just so some people adopt their technology?

This just raises red flags and smells.

There's got to be some catch like they are going to start charging those companies a monthly fee to use their product or license it after they have already committed and it's too late to change.

It was just a bad joke, but in all seriousness, that was a big wake up call for a lot of people about the tangled web of npm dependencies.

Left-bad, I mean, the left-pad fiasco should have been the wake up call.

I think it is hilarious when people argue with Trump on Twitter, because I realize he is 71 years old. He's literally someone's old grandpa on Twitter. How many 71 year olds do you know on Twitter? How many people do you know would argue and talk shit with a 71 year old grandpa on Twitter?

I understand he's not just _any_ 71 year old grandpa, but it's so funny to think about it that way.

Less than 10% of nurses are men. Is it worth writing an article when a man becomes a nurse?

Honestly, I doubt they did it for _financial_ reasons. Likely an old division that is being closed or downsized, like they specifically mentioned last time (the old cable tv divsion was being downsized in favor of the online streaming divsion). Most companies do layoff rounds at the turn of the year. Honestly, I think firing people can be a good thing. How many people do you work with that are total dead weight and you wish they were fired? It's normal business practice to do this, and 500 people out of 153,000 is 0.0032 or less than half of a percent of employees.

> maybe it was finding common ground talking about your wife instead of your husband, maybe it was when you didn't need to wonder whether you were turned down for skill or skin color

And maybe I am a self-taught gay Puerto Rican who disagrees that gay people need special encouragement in order to succeed.

> My career (and surely the career of the article writer and anyone else who is not a bro) came as a result of the other 50%, talented, generous men and women whose shared their expertise and encouraged me.

I guess the difference is that some people don't need the encouragement of others in order to succeed. Many great programmers are self taught and self motivated. How has being gay made it harder to learn to program? Did people tell you gays weren't allowed? Did they tell you to quit because gays aren't good at coding? Did they ask you, "Wait, you're a programmer, and you're GAY!?" Did other programmers make fun of you for being gay? Was the encouragement you got specifically about being gay? Is it because you are gay that you needed the extra encouragement? Just trying to understand...

Why is being a woman so important it is part of the title? Do women have a harder time learning? Is it a bigger accomplishment when a woman does it? Are people more fascinated by the fact that a _woman_ was able to code? I know, whenever I hear that a woman learned to code, I immediately think 'holy cow! no way! I wouldn't have cared if a man learned to code, but this was a woman. I better read this article.'

Do titles like this make girls feel empowered or does it make them feel like only super-women can program because if a woman learns to program, it is worthy of magazine article. If I was a young girl and I saw articles like 'I'm a woman, and I learned to program!' I'd probably feel like 'geez, it really takes a lot of work for a woman to be a programmer and it is so rare that whenever it happens they write articles about it.'

Jeez, this guy gets really angry and swears for pages and pages over a stupid little feature he doens't like.

I would rather see independent (private) solutions before inviting a bunch of bureaucratic red tape to manufacturers.

For example, someone could create a company that issued certificates of security. Manufacturers would pay a small fee to these companies to perform security tests and give them a certificate of security. They can put that label on their products to provide confidence to consumers. Some products may warrant a much higher level of scrutiny than others so there could be different levels or different companies that offer it.

I think people will naturally choose the products that are 'certified' over the ones that aren't, and manufacturers will have to end up doing it to stay competitive.

This is part of the reason Go is gaining so much popularity. It gives you back all the power and speed of typed, compiled language but without all the tedious parts of C like managing memory and complicated threading.

You can already "go run program.go" from anywhere, even outside of a project structure, which is the same result as running an interpreted script.

It's a novel idea but I don't really see it taking off. Is there really that much benefit to having a shebang at the top of the file versus executing "go run" and is it really worth having a REPL for a fairly verbose language? I certainly don't see myself wishing for a Java REPL, and I don't particular see myself reaching for a Go REPL either.

It's the same reason they can't get good security experts to teach at universities. There was a study of 121 top universities and none of the top 10 require a course, top 3 didn't even offer an elective. Only 3 of the top 50 required a single security course.

https://www.cloudpassage.com/company/press-releases/cloudpas...

Totally agree with this. If they were tragically underemployed for years, I'd bet almost anything it was not because of their college GPA.

Nobody looks at GPA, or cares, or even expects it to be there, unless you have never had a job and have nothing else to put on your resume.

As someone who has interviewed many developers, GPA has never, ever even come up as a topic.

Yes.

When I hear "we only hire the best" it just sounds like generic crap an HR person added, not a big red flag that they are snobs. I don't think it really means anything. By definition, anyone hiring anyone wants to only hire the best. Nobody wants to hire only the mediocre. If I hear things like that I generally just ignore it.

Anyway, the author makes all kinds of unfounded assumptions. Someone with .NET and Windows experience may not actually be relevant to a backend Unix system. Their assumption though is "they don't like Windows people." Is it not actually possible their work experience was irrelevant? Is the first or most reasonable conclusion you come to really, 'they don't like windows people." Seriously?

That is purely an assumption driven by their own stereotypes and opinions. "They said they didn't hire me because my experience was irrelevant, but I know the truth. They are bigoted against Windows people! That's the REAL reason!"

Most developers don't know security

http://www.akashasec.com/most-developers-dont-know-security/

This is what I think most people fail to understand. It's not a _requirement_. The vast majority of people DON'T have side projects. Companies can't afford to simply auto-reject everyone who doesn't have side projects. The point is that if you do have any, it can help make you stand out dramatically.

This is basically the sentiment that I share. If you aren't willing to put in a couple hours on one Saturday of your life to putting up one script in an effort to help your career, you probably don't care enough about the job you are applying for.

I think you missed a lot of the comments saying, you don't have to live, eat, and breath code in order to have some code you've written up on GitHub. You don't have to spend every waking breath coding in order to write a script that will order you a pizza or something. You're life doesn't have to revolve around programming to find one weekend out of the year to write a program or spend 1 hour per week working on something.

I am a developer and I like to do plenty of things outside of programming. I ride motorcycles, read books (and writing a book!), play guitar/violin/piano, learn Russian, digital paint, make 3d art models, play video games, go out to eat, karaoke, go to meetups, blog, etc, etc. Most developers I know have plenty of hobbies outside of programming, but still manage to squeeze in some time for side projects. It does not have to consume your life...

This was my hangup too. The author implies that it was simply because they didn't have any side projects that they were rejected. I find that hard to believe though because why would they bother bringing them in for an interview if they didn't have any side projects? Plus, 90% of the applicants I ever saw didn't have side projects, so they'd have to auto-reject 90% of their applicants. Why bother bringing in one of the 90% auto-rejects for an interview?

> However, I don't and won't spend every waking hour I have doing one thing

Why does everyone think that it requires every spare second you have to write a couple programs and post them on GitHub? Can you spare 1 hour per week? Why would it require every waking hour you have to write a couple scripts and throw them in GitHub?

You shouldn't put _actual_ work code you wrote on GitHub, but you should write your own small sample programs that demonstrate you know how to use a certain library that you just learned, and then you have it as reference code for yourself later and it shows you know a specific technology.

When I vet resumes, I most definitely look at any code their provide, but I don't always ask them about it. If they didn't put it on their resume, I don't specifically ask them about it either because they should have put it on the resume. If you put it on your resume, you can't say for sure they didn't look at it and factor that in when reviewing candidates.