HN user

blakecaldwell

226 karma
Posts1
Comments59
View on HN

I can see this for a team of interns on a summer project, but not senior devs that don’t really get stuck that often, or know to involve someone for the brief periods where they need a second set of eyes.

TLDR Stock Options 9 years ago

This. If you have a CFO, contact that person. If not, then anyone in finance, or a partner. Everyone is there for pay. This is a reasonable request.

I spend most of my time in Go these days, and find that it's goroutine model is perfectly suited for both I/O and CPU-bound services. The runtime decides if a thread is needed, and will spawn one any time you're waiting on a syscall.

Wouldn't you agree that a compiled language is typically much easier to maintain than an interpreted one (refactoring, etc). Also, it's been years since I've worked in C#, but I would imagine you could stay in the language but ditch the frameworks.

Agree. I like Go for the same reason. With Java, there's a weird pressure to spend a week designing class hierarchies and to set up all the factories and abstract factories. In Go - uh, you can do it, but you're going against the grain.

Yeah. You can save a lot of your time, and the candidates' time with a simple coding interview - even FizzBuzz will knock out half of the candidates. Then pair up and/or give a take-home, then discuss the solution in a one-on-one session.

Coding interviews are very stressful, and churn through a lot of really awesome potential hires. I imagine there are tons of false negatives, but it's nearly impossible for a terrible programmer to get through a gauntlet of programming interviews. However, I agree. They don't give a full picture of a developer's abilities.

As a developer, I prefer take-home projects. As an interviewer, I prefer a few coding interviews, followed by a take-home project.

It's not just sharpness of focus. There's that, because of - I believe - how densely different areas of our retinas are populated with cones and rods. That's not the same thing that's going on when you look at a tree in front of you, and then the mountains miles away.

The screen is flat. If you were playing a game that occupies 3D space, the game could mimic real depth by changing how it looks depending on where you're looking. It would blur things as they'd be blurred in real life. Or maybe they'd double up things close to us when we look far away, like when you hold a finger in front of your face and then stare far away, or vice-versa. I think we probably rarely notice these things in real life. Maybe this would make it feel magically more real.

My Keyboard 11 years ago

If you find good ergo computer equipment, buy two extra copies.