model_tar_gz

@model_tar_gz@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How do I make a phone call to (not from) an elevator speaker, just like what a debt collector once did?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, and in so doing, payed down their debt.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨“This was CS50”: Yale ends largest computer science course⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  The online version will remark free and available. The in-person, for credit course is being discontinued. Unless you are an incoming Harvard student, this won’t affect you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"Introducing you Fast Music Remover, a free and open source tool that filters internet media"⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  My use case will be to remove the looping bland house music from tech product demos. I really don’t understand why every tech company needs to make me feel like I’m at a club when I’m just there to learn about a new feature in their product and how I can use it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What's next after Half-Life?⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I relatively recently tried to replay Goldeneye. It was shocking—controller and FPS mechanics have evolved so much since then it was honestly not fun to play. While it was breakthrough tech at the time it just did not age well.

  So many hours of fun into that game though; I’ll never not hold a special place in my heart for it even if it’s unplayable nostalgia now.

  FPS keyboard+mouse shooters of that era have aged much better. I can still play Marathon (+2 + Infinity) (Bungie’s precursors to Halo) and have an enjoyable gaming session.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Fuck geometry⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  You didn’t really expect an imaginary triangle to behave like a real one, did you?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨little roombas⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Now waitaminit—you’re saying that my Roomba has hallucinogens inside it? I tripped over it the other day, but this is a much different kind of bad trip hazard than I was led to think.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Patient gamers, what are your favorite OSTs?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I listen to Stellaris OST a lot these days. Turns out that good music to plan galactic domination is also good music to design and build software.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Noice⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Pretty sure my Calc2 prof pulled this trick on us sometime in the solids of revolution unit. Started deriving something on the board, just another cylinder ok, but wtf are you calling the radius ‘z’?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IFIXIT: Victory Is Sweet - We Can Now Fix McDonald’s Ice Cream Machines⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Costco’s soft-serve is way better than McD’s and actually is cheap.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Bitwarden Makes Change To Address Recent Open-Source Concerns⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Bullshit. Developers never make mistakes. N.E.V.R.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nintendo Targets YouTube Accounts Showing Emulated Games⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Can’t wait for Nintendo to sue Microsoft because VS Code can be used to edit save files.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨👣👣👣⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ve rejected someone on their 4th round before—1st round with me. That candidate had managed to convince the recruiter that they had the chops for a staff engineer (>$200k/yr!) and passed two coding rounds before mine, testing knowledge of relevant techs on our stack—at this level of role, you have to know this coming in; table stakes.

  I was giving the systems design round. Asked them to design something that was on their resume—they couldn’t. They’d grossly misrepresented their role/involvement in that project and since they were interviewing for a staff level role, high-level design is going to be a big part of it and will impact the product and development team in significant ways. No doubt they’d been involved in implementing, and can code—but it was very clear that they didn’t understand the design decisions that were made and I had no confidence that they would contribute positively in our team.

  Sucks for them to be rejected, but one criteria we look for is someone who will be honest when they don’t know—and we do push to find the frontiers of their knowledge. We even instruct them to just say it when they don’t know and we can problem-solve together. But a lot of people have too much ego to accept that, but we don’t have time for people like that on the team either.

  Look, I get what you’re saying and clearly I’ve been on the wrong end of it too, but if we make a bad hiring decision, it costs not just the candidate their job but also the team and company they work on can get into a bad place too. What would you do in that situation? Just hire them anyway and risk the livelihood of everyone else on the team? That’s a non-starter; try to see a bigger picture.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨👣👣👣⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I don’t know if I agree with that. Having been on the hiring side of the table more than a few times.

  Hiring a new employee is a risk; especially when you’re hiring at a senior enough level where the wrong decisions are amplified as the complexity of the software grows—and it becomes far more expensive to un/redo bad architectural decisions.

  And the amount of time it takes for even an experienced engineer to learn their way around your existing stack, understand the reasons for certain design decisions, and contribute in a way that’s not disruptive—that’s like 6 months minimum for some code bases. More if there’s crazy data flows and weird ML stuff. And if they’re “full stack (backend and frontend) then it’s gonna be even longer before you see how good of a hiring decision you really made. For a $160k+/yr senior dev role, that’s $80k (before benefits and other onboarding costs) before you really expect to see anything really significant.

  So you schedule as many interviews as you need to get a feel for what they can do, because false negatives are way less expensive than false positives.

  Sometimes people can be cunning: charm, wow annd woo their way past even the savviest of recruiters with the right combinations of jargon patterns.

  Sometimes they can even fool a technical round interviewer.

  4-5 interviews (esp. if the last is an onsite in which you’ll meet many) seems to be about the norm in my field. Even if it kinda sucks for the person looking for the job.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨👣👣👣⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  … come to think of it now, I would have played ball with them if they’d just been transparent about the situation upfront. It was good interview practice and in retrospect prepared me well for the interviews at my current role. And I’m way happier with this company than I would’ve been there.

  The Universe does funny things.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨👣👣👣⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I took an interview like this before. I checked the vast majority of the boxes of technologies used, and experience in a specific type of processing models prior to deployment. Thought it was bagged and tagged mine. 4 rounds of interviews, two technical rounds and a system design.

  Asked me some hyper-specific question about X and wanted a hyper-specific implementation of Z technology to solve the problem. The way I solved it would have worked, but it wasn’t the X they were looking for.

  Turns out the guy interviewing me at the second tech interview round was the manager of the guy he wanted in the role—and the guy working for him already was the founder of the startup that commercialized X, and they just needed to check a box for corporate saying they’d done their diligence looking for a relevant senior engineer.

  That fucking company put me through the wringer for that bullshit. 4 rounds of interviews.

  Never again.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Soup⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Fun fact: the scientist’s name was Adam, and the soup was primordial.