varsock

Hey, you go it!

FYI, you can financially support Rebble and get perks like being able to reply with voice to messages. I don't personally do so but I know people who have had success with it.

For comparison, my Pebble with everything turned off (like health tracking, apps, steps, alarms etc) and only BT on for notifications, I get about a week still

I don't have an opinion in this debate. I just started playing with Go and planning on doing so with Rust.

I wanted to point to the fact that Go is also in flux and is also seeing changes to its semantics, and this is relavent in the current events with Go 1.21 being released less than a month ago.

https://go.dev/blog/go1.21

In a future version of Go we’re planning to address one of the most common gotchas of Go programming: loop variable capture. Go 1.21 comes with a preview of this feature that you can enable in your code using an environment variable. See the LoopvarExperiment wiki page for more details.

no problem! that's what the internet and forums are for :D

Rebble was easier to get working than gadget bridge. just something to consider

thank you for answering my questions :)

How are these books delivered/viewed? DRMed epub or PDFs or through one of the websites?

I see the bundle says

use on any device; PDF ePUB, MOBI

anyone have any experience?

Valid point. Again for the sake of discussion, technology evolves quickly. New tools are made out of the shortcoming of others. If docker evolves and a new tool - Kocker - is born, AI will need training data from best practices which should be generated by people.

This could unfold in many ways. For one there could a small group of people pushing technology forward. But people will need to be around to create requirements, which takes experience.

More likely, majority of engineers will likely just move up to a higher level of abstraction, letting new tools do the lower layer stuff. And any innovations in the lower levels of abstraction will be done by a small group of people with niche skills (take CPUs for example). This is the trend we saw historically. Assembly -> compilers -> lower languages -> interpreted languages -> scaling bare metal systems -> distributed systems -> virtual machines -> automation -> micro services etc etc

I agree with you and share the same opinions.

For discussion sake I will add that, using AI I have became so fast at creating "units of code" or restructuring. I ask it to solve a narrow narrow scope and introduce constraints (like conditional variable and which parameters, initial conditions). And it does. I have the experience validate by reading and to piece together the units of code but now my productivity near tripled.

I don't write comments anymore. I write what I neeed, ask it to comment the function, maybe I'll add something that is project specific.

And getting started with new technologies is easier as long as, like you said, keep the scope small.

AI will not replace programmers. Programmers that use AI will replace programmers who don't.

my experience with hackerrank is a company will use hackerrank platform to facilitate the online assessment - NOT look at someone "hacker rank" like you mentioned.

Candidates follows a link a company sent them and gives them an in-browser IDE to solve a problem. The platform records keystrokes, mouse events (like if you left the tab) etc etc. Then when you submit your code it is complied, executed in a sandbox, and tested with test cases. Based on which test cases pass, the execution time and memory usage, hacker rank will generate a report and fwd to the hiring team.

What I was saying in the above comment is if you had the right idea but your code didn't compile or failed the test case, it's as if you failed entirely. No hiring teams sits there and reads the code. Not even garuanteed that an engineer is reviewing your submission.

Hackerrank (to my knowledge) does not parse the code to determine your knowledge of algorithms, data structures, etc etc, it inferes it from which test cases passed and their execution time amd memory usage.

I agree with you. practically speaking, candidates don't have a way to tell if the problem they are solving applies to the role, especially when bringing tour skillset to a new-ish domain.

That being said, hackerrank generates a report based on if you pass or fail. Hiring managers tend to only look at the metrics in the report instead judging the candidate based on their approach to the problem. And for code that doesn't run, the metrics are nearly all 0. Not to mention there is no fucking debugger to step through the code and catch the 1 off index error that is common to make when you're under pressure.

Anyway I'm beginning to rant. There are a lot of things that should be addressed but as long as someone else can solve it and the candidate pool is large, there is no point to optimize the selection process (from a company point of view). They feel as if they are getting the best candidate because they assume better experienced == better chance of passing

when you say whiteboarding do you include programming tests or take home problems?

I stay away from FAANG like companies but my experience is everyone asks them. I'm curious what kind of roles don't - how can I keep an eye out for them?

fantasize of all the ways I can hand in my resignation.

Then 3 months go by and still no offer, lower the bar and fantasize of all the ways I can hand in my resignation - but nicer