The positive side of such repetitive posts is that sometime there are some newcomers which will get to know about these amazing resources, which will be helpful to them in many different ways.
They are nice guides (even if I remember them being bashed in the old days, or maybe that was just his Win32 programming guide), however the audience of them (programming network sockets in C) seems lost here.
>and descriptions that are not representative of the job they're trying to hire for.
The position is described as a UX engineer and designer, and the applicant is expected to be experienced with JS and various frameworks for it.
The story seems to be more about a person who can't read and feels entitled to a job position they're not fit for. They were unable to display knowledge of basic for loops and conditionals and they were unable to convert a timecode string into seconds. Both of which are basically tests for "does this person even understand programming". Which they obviously don't because they wrote "OMG MATH" to a problem consisting only of the most basic logical concepts.
Maybe next time they should apply for a job that doesn't require programming knowledge.
I don't disagree with you that the job expected programming in their candidate. Nor should she have rationalized away the two lines that mentioned Javascript in description. However, I do believe that there is a communication error on the part of the company.
A UI/UX Designer/Engineer does not inherently require programming. In many startups, it does, as does wearing many hats. But if they're looking for someone to program, it should be outlined in the responsibilities. Knowing "HTML/CSS/JS" is different than building an entire application (just an example).
Not only that, but the line "Experienced with Object Oriented JavaScript and modern JavaScript libraries such as Ember, Backbone, or Angular." was placed under "Preferred Qualifications", which to me says "desirable but not necessarily required". If that's not what they meant, they should have clarified the importance.
My personal opinion is that if a job wants you to build stuff, they should outright say "You will be responsible for developing and maintaing a code base, in addition to designing and lending UI/UX expertise" rather than just loading a job listing with keywords.
> A UI/UX Designer/Engineer does not inherently require programming.
I would argue that UI/UX Designer might not, but UI/UX Engineer inherently does.
> But if they're looking for someone to program, it should be outlined in the responsibilities.
It was.
> Knowing "HTML/CSS/JS" is different than building an entire application (just an example).
FizzBuzz doesn't test ability to "build an entire application". It tests fairly minimal ability to apply logical reasoning and apply it with a programming language.
If you can't solve FizzBuzz in a programming language, its not unreasonable for a company to see that as a strong negative signal for any job requiring proficiency in the language, and JS proficiency was advertised as a requirement for the job in question.
Like I mentioned below, as a self taught web programmer, it was years before I came across a modulus in a real-world situation. I feel like it's understandable to not have a 100% grasp on all the basics and still produce stuff.
I think the more damning thing in her case is her questioning the question and seemingly not giving it a thorough effort.
Again, just listing "HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript." by itself as a minimum qualification doesn't specify what level of knowledge is expected of you. Familiarity? Proficiency? Master? Do you need to know how v8 interprets Javascript?
I'm not making the case that the job was right for her or that she was competent enough to handle it. I'm arguing that ambiguities in descriptions wasted both her time and the company's time.
> Like I mentioned below, as a self taught web programmer, it was years before I came across a modulus in a real-world situation.
So? Like I mentioned in response to that, modulus isn't necessary for FizzBuzz.
> Again, just listing "HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript." by itself as a minimum qualification doesn't specify what level of knowledge is expected of you.
FizzBuzz doesn't require much depth of knowledge in the target programming language. If you are can handle assignment, addition, conditional logic, and any one of iteration, jumping, or recursion (note that some language may not support all three of those, so which are available depends on language), you can do FizzBuzz.
What FizzBuzz does require (assuming you haven't already studied it and memorized a solution in the language given) is being able to think through a dirt simple problem and apply a programming language to it. It identifies people with minimal programming skills as distinct from those who are limited to cargo cult copypasta (well, again, except that memorization means it can produce false positives.)
Yeah, you're right. FizzBuzz does test a programmers mindset and it's pretty clear she didn't meet those expectations. I was focusing on a tiny aspect of it.
The main point I was trying to get at is that it doesn't seem to me like she identifies as a programmer. She's a UI/UX designer with a little bit of code experience. IMO, the whole point of it wasn't that she was upset that she didn't get the job or what they asked her. It was simply that based on the description, she went in thinking the primary focus was mockups, design and user testing rather than programming. Had the post been more clear about their expectations for the position, she wouldn't have tried for it.
I think the job posting clearly communicated that the applicant should at least have a basic grasp of JavaScript. On a related note, it's weird that the author claims to have experience with Ember/Angular.js or other similar frameworks without being able to write the FizzBuzz.
To be fair, I was a self taught programmer (albeit PHP) and I was on my second or third programming job before I came across a modulus in the wild. It's really simple basic programming theory, but not super common in live web development.
That's not being fair. That's your own problem. I'm also a self-taught programmer, but I don't feel like I need to compare myself to her.
The point is that she didn't fit the requirements of the job.
As a result, she did not get the job. That's pretty much end of story. If the job requires her to be "experienced with JS", that means that they want her to know the language.
And it's not just modulo. She didn't know how to convert a timecode string to seconds.
I have no idea how someone like that would be able to understand the code. Nor why she would think that "it's okay" not knowing those things and yet be an engineer at their company.
To repeat what has been said - she was not applying to a job as a designer. She was applying to a job as an engineer and designer. She didn't meet at least half the criteria (and she didn't have degrees, which is probably why they even asked her those questions to test what actual knowledge she has).
Yeah, I guess I didn't quite make my point clear. All I meant was that it's easy to work inside frameworks without truely understanding the language.
I wasn't "comparing" myself to her. I was just explaining how it could happen. I agree that she wasn't qualified for the job and didn't deserve to get it. But I'd be willing to guess that if they job had a line like "This job will be 75% programming, 25% ui/ux design", she wouldn't have applied. I feel like she was looking for a design job but didn't find out otherwise until the middle of the interview.
> To be fair, I was a self taught programmer (albeit PHP) and I was on my second or third programming job before I came across a modulus in the wild.
Knowing of an existing modulus operator/function isn't necessary to solve FizzBuzz; there's a fairly simple solution with just add/increment, assignment, and conditional logic without modulus.
Yeah, you're right about that. I was just trying to explain how you can work in an environment and make websites, but not necessarily grasp a full understanding of the language you're working in.
But my feeling from the post was that she is first and foremost a UI/UX designer, with some supplemental jquery/js knowledge. She applied for the job thinking it was a fit, but didn't find out otherwise until the middle of the interview. She wasn't qualified for what they were looking for, but I can empathize with the ambiguity in some of the job listings requirements.
These are all roughly a year apart and it's a very interesting article. I don't really see a big problem with reposts that far apart to catch newcomers' eye.
Incidentally, can you not see the irony of your own statement? Please, stop with your valueless comments. This article is and remains a perfectly valid submission to HN.
Well, with Russia's already severe lack of independent media or freedom of speech and the active repression of both, things are certainly looking a lot bleaker than anywhere in the west, including the US.
The problem with US propaganda (like New York Times) is the US is the far more powerful mafia boss than say Russia. (Just look at militant attacks which reach across the world, not to mention incarceration.) Furthermore, people should be concerned with their own country's criminality, not hypocritically pointing the finger at official enemies like Russia. (As this is a US-dominated forum.)
Furthermore, people should be concerned with their own country's criminality, not hypocritically pointing the finger at official enemies like Russia.
It's only hypocritical if you don't also point the finger at your own flaws. Which people in this forum do. A lot.
Besides, not everyone agrees anymore with the notion that they must "have a country". What's my country? I have double nationality, and I live in an union of 28 countries. Lots of us work and live moving from country to country. And I feel more at home with some people here than with the average citizen of my city.
I still hold a soft spot for the place I grew up in, but I don't consider myself tied to it. It's not mine, nor do I belong to it.
How much karma do you need on HN to downvote? Because this deserves one.
How often are we going to repeat this point?
Okay, as slowly and clearly as I can:
"Two wrongs don't make a right."
Just because the US does bad thing X, doesn't mean we can't talk about another country doing bad thing X.
Please, for the love of baby Jesus and his family. Please. Please.
I won't even top it off with a "the country's people are not the same as its government," or anything like it. I just beg of you, please, please stop using this line of reasoning.
I'm so exhausted of seeing it. It wears me down.
PS: GP has a point, he sketches the context. Fine. "Russia is not the only one, also US." Okay, it's true. But when you say "don't talk about Russia, because US!" then no. No, no, no, no. No.
EDIT: Can't reply to "rational-future", so I'll say it here: No, not at all. The opposite. As I said: "GP has a point". My problem is here:
> Furthermore, people should be concerned with their own country's criminality, not hypocritically pointing the finger at official enemies like Russia.
This is wrong. Telling people to shut up because their government / countrymen / ... does the same thing. Sure, call them out for being hypocrites. But even hypocrites have a right to speak. So, yeah: do talk about the US. Sure. Give me context. As long as you leave all the room for the original discussion.
I feel like you completely missed the point of his comment. Probably purposefully.
To answer your question, just because something is "wrong" doesn't mean something can't be more "wrong". Just because I jaywalked yesteday doesn't mean I'm on the same level as a meth dealer, for example.
Life isn't black and white, it's shades of grey. Something can be much darker than another thing. And it's OK to point that out. As is the case here. The U.S media certainly isn't up to snuff, but the situation in Russia and other state-owned news agenicies are absolutely horrible by comparison. There may be poverty in the U.S but that doesn't mean it's on the same level as in a country like Ethiopia.
As much as the Russian defenders want to equate the two, they are NOT comparable.
>The total area of the Pearl River Delta is about 40,000 km^2.
The definition of the urban land for PRD and Tokyo as used by the World Bank report is ~7000 square kilometers (PRD) and ~5500 square kilometers (Tokyo).
They do not count the entirety of either of the two. For the aforementioned areas (that they deemed urban land), they estimated them to have populations of around 42M (PRD) and around 31M (Tokyo).
This area excludes Hong Kong and many other parts.
Grauniad did a very poor job at getting the World Bank report's message across.
I am not arguing this point on licenses or no licenses, however I would say that assuming the client has provided an informed consent, then the client should be allowed to use whatever car service they want. If I hitchhike, I assume the risk with no expectation of protection. Consumers should have a right to use whatever they want -- provided they are aware of what they are consuming.
However the odd thing about Uber in Korea is that taxis are already relatively cheap. It isn't quite the overpriced racket it seems to be in other places. Also I find it odd that suddenly Korea is concerned about safety especially given the overall lack of safety consciousness at the government level (for example overloaded ferries sinking due to government officials looking the other way in regards to permitting and safety inspections.) I lived in Korea for a total of 4 years and, it comes down to this: nationalism and protectionism. This isn't about safety at all -- this is about someone getting (or not getting) paid. The mad cow hysteria a few years ago is a great example -- North American producers were effectively shut out of the market over unsubstantiated government claims of a mad cow risk.. Thus effectively subsidizing a far less efficient domestic market. During the time of their 'concern' over mad cow, not a single American or Candian was harmed by the so-called tainted beef. Yet safety was the propaganda with which they effectively killed beef imports. The Uber situation is no different. The Chaebols own Korea -- to an even far greater scale than large corporations 'own' the US. Korea is almost entirely run by three (perhaps 4) corporations. Everything from media, communications, heavy industry real estate, autos, food production.. All owned by Samsung, LG, Daewoo (and Lotte.) Wrong or right isn't my point, my point is that Uber isn't playing with (or paying) the right people, thus this action by the government. There's a reason the largest Korean banknote was no bigger than 10,000 won ($10) (though now they apparently have a $50 note) -- it was a result of a feeble attempt to reduce large cash payments under the table. Here's a badly written article discussing that idea: http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/phone/news/view.jsp?req_newsidx=15...
> assuming the client has provided an informed consent
How would the client be informed on issues such as
* proper vehicle maintenance records
* prior criminal record
* history of accidents and insurance claims
* presence of proper insurance to cover client's medical costs or property loss costs in case of an accident
This is something that is required of properly licensed transportation companies (i.e. anybody working under Uber Black). Until the client has a quick and convenient way to research that information, we can only pretend the consent is informed.
If I offer you a ride to the airport for ten bucks,should the state prosecute me criminally? Or is that true only if I use the I Internet to do it? What if I post in an online forum?
The state can certainly require me to purchase insurance to own a vehicle. Clearly in the public's interest. Perhaps that insurance should cover riders. Great discussion. But this is simply crony capitalism. There may be risk, but there is no crime here. At all.
I wonder how HN'ers would feel if the U.S. government decided to respond to a "cybersecurity crisis" by requiring licensure and fulfillment of a host of legal requirements (such as posting a bond or insurance) before anyone can program or administer any public-facing computer. After all, they'd just be looking out for the public interest. Surely no one wants laissez faire software development!
That's not to say there is no "public interest", but rather that the public interest is something that has to be balanced against other interests, and the freedom to ply a trade is a pretty important one.
> But this is simply crony capitalism. There may be risk, but there is no crime here. At all.
That is where you are quite wrong. The regulations of taxis goes way back to carriage regulations in the 19th century. The reason for this is clear: to ensure that the vehicle is maintained, the driver doesn't have a history of attacking or abducting passengers, and that pricing is transparent and passengers aren't gouged.
Taxis are not private transportation, period. They are a form of public transportation and function more like a transit utility. To not offer basic regulation of taxis is to leave the public at large in significant danger of being ripped off, maimed, and/or assaulted.
You are quite right about the reason for carriage laws. They're right out of two centuries ago, where a person who got into a conveyance had no idea what they might be getting into.
Those days are long gone, however. Today I can buy a used car on Ebay, committing thousands of dollars to a sale for a product I've never seen and a seller I'll never meet, all without worrying about the transaction. Why? Because information flows much more freely. The commercial transaction that used to take a government guarantee now just requires an open exchange of information about past history -- which is trivial to accomplish.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9445692
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=584557
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9623813
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5989561
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7584974
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=286701
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6779200
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9018621
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7917102
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4666318
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1593037
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=337371