My experience was the same as tedvim above - it was utterly dehumanizing and there's no way I want that either for myself or for the people I hire. The interviewers were smug little shits who didn't take feedback to ask questions relevant to the position.
Further - you guys lurk all over HN commenting like this every time there's an interview thread. It's submarining and it's gross.
The rules at Karat may be that giving any kind of help pretty much automatically disqualifies the candidate, so technically they're better off giving you no help at all in the hopes you make as much progress on your own rather than ruining your interview by giving you help prematurely.
Yep pretty much this. I was a contract interviewer with Karat for a few years and taught people how to conduct interviews. There's a graded scale of assistance, anything more than gentle prompting to re-read your code or the error output starts counting against you. If I have to point out a block of code or even a line, then that's getting to the point that most clients will pass you over when they review your interview, so the rules are we don't give that stuff proactively.
I used the "may" word as I wasn't sure it's something we are meant to be disclosing, but now that the cat is out of the bag you are indeed 100% correct and this matches my experience.
One thing I didn't appreciate with these rules from a candidate perspective (and encouraged my decision not to continue my onboarding with Karat), there seems to be no way to learn from the process. I actually bombed my practice interview (and knew it would happen even before the interview) but the interviewer was very reluctant (due to the above rules) to actually solve the problem with me, where as a conventional non-Karat failed interview would at least give me the solution in the end and I'd at least learn something.
Karat embodies everything wrong with the tech industry, and Triplebyte wasn't much better. I've interviewed - and hired - hundreds of people in my career. This robotic approach with a focus on either standardized test type material and/or the leetcode interviews where how we interview doesn't match the work itself - it's just all so broken. I don't know the fix, but I know this isn't it.
Lemme share still another perspective that hasn't gotten any media time... my accountant at the time recommended we apply for EIDL instead of PPP, for various reasons. So here we sit now several years later with PPP as free money, having to start paying on our EIDL loans, all because we legit needed the money but chose the wrong option. So yeah - very, very frustrating to see the ways that so many people who clearly didn't need the money got a free government handout while those that did need the money just ended up with debt.
I'm a white dude, and had an incident a number of years ago in which a group of Indian contractors basically didn't want to work with me because I was a white dude. Used a number of slang racist terms in my direction. I didn't make a stink about it because I was a consultant just there on a short-term project, but it was memorable. As another commenter suggested, even the whole "white people" branding that happens in social media is comical, given centuries of one white group looking down on another white group. I'm glad to see this kind of social dialog about racism / classism in all of its forms and think it is very worthwhile to realize that it isn't just about the stereotype of white (males) hating on everyone else as is generally portrayed.
Hobby beekeeper here... I kinda disagree with her final summary... I get her point, but there are benefits to encouraging more people to keep them:
-- Additional pollinators.
-- Awareness. I've witnessed for myself in my own backyard the effects of our unusual weather this spring (ahem: climate change) through observing how my bees are interacting with my garden and trees.
-- Overall benefit: Personally, tending them makes for great therapy and my neighbors love the honey.
-- Advocacy. When you are in-tune with the impact of climate change, pesticides, herbicides, and overall aware of the ecology around you, you are more likely to make political and consumer choices based on those learned / observed experiences.
Perhaps its a coincidence, but I noticed more native bees in my garden now too. I don't think I've done anything net-new in terms of flowers or trees since I started keeping honey bees, but maybe I'm just more aware of the native bees now? Disappointed I've not been able to attract Mason bees, but I've got at least three other varieties buzzing around regularly and I've identified the hive of at least one of those types.
um... why do you think these conservative judges were named to the court? They know exactly what they are doing and have every intention of ending contraception, sending women's rights back to the dark ages, and screwing over anyone not straight, Christian, and white. That's the job they were nominated to do.
> The vast vast majority of Americans are ok with contraceptives, same sex marriage has firm constitutional basis, etc these aren’t going away
Across-the-board bans on contraception aren't happening, because almost nobody wants such a ban.
But overturning Obergefell? I think it is likely. According to 2021 polling data [0], there is still majority opposition to marriage equality in Mississippi (55% oppose) and Arkansas (52% oppose). It looks like the state government trying to overturn it would be a vote-winner in those two states – especially considering that people who actually vote often skew older and more conservative than the population in general, so opposition to it in those states may be even stronger among voters. There are other states where support is still quite weak, such as Alabama (49% support, 47% opposition) and South Carolina (50% support), so the same might be true for them as well. It only takes one state to act to get a case before the Supreme Court.
While the Catholic Church does teach that artificial contraception is inherently sinful, it’s leadership has not - certainly in recent decades - displayed any interest in having that moral view enforced by law. If no state enacts a general ban on contraception, SCOTUS will never get the opportunity to directly rule on its constitutionality.
Also, much of the success of the movement to restrict abortion has been because it has been a cross-faith alliance - Catholics, Evangelicals, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, among others. The same winning formula won’t work for a general ban on contraception, because Catholics are the only member of that coalition who believe that artificial contraception is inherently sinful-the others view its moral acceptability as more situation-dependent.
> You’re laying out the definition of a slippery slope argument.
When Clarence Thomas says "here's the slope I think we should slide down next", we're not in fallacy land anymore.
> these aren’t going away
Don't worry! They won't go away. It'll just be up to the state governments currently passing laws forcing women to carry rapists' babies to term to decide if you can have sex outside of marriage or not. States rights!
> The vast vast majority of Americans are ok with contraceptives
The trigger laws that just went into effect in several cases would appear to ban some contraception, like IUDs (or, rather, criminalize it when they work), since they result in termination of pregnancy as the laws define it. (Because they use fertilization, not implantation, as the definition of the start of pregnancy.)
Of course, there's a proof issue for any actual prosecution for homicide, but that's a practical barrier to enforcement that doesn't affect what the law prohibits.
Consider this a bit of code switching. Many of us absolutely are concerned about what this means for women, but we also know that this forum skews male and a particular kind of male. So we are making the argument here that resonates with this forum.
You are right though that more people overall - even those who skew conservative and pro-individual rights, should realize that if you take away rights from women, and then homosexuals, and then people who want to be married to someone of a different race... where does it end in terms of stripping away individual rights? I'd argue that if you view women's health care as a matter of individual freedom and rights, then is that not the same argument being made in interpreting the 2nd amendment as not about militias (IE: a standing army) but the rights of the individual? If I can tell women they can't have a set of health care services, what's stopping the government from telling men that they can't have a different set of health care services?
Rights has a very specific meaning in the US legal system. Abortion is not listed as a right in the Constitution, and it therefore is not a federal right.
We can argue that it should be, but now we're talking about an ammendment, which is legally necessary and the real conversation the nation should be having.
*I don't think it could ever qualify as a right. Rights are negative, not positive. You could not guarantee the right to an abortion because now you're guaranteeing someone to the right to have someone else do work for them. Instead, it would need to be enumerated as a negative right, meaning that there would be federal protection against the outlawing of abortions.
>> is that not the same argument being made in interpreting the 2nd amendment as not about militias (IE: a standing army) but the rights of the individual?
"The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved."
You can read pages 1 and 2 of that decision to see the summary of the Supreme Court's argument for why 2nd Amendment rights are individual rights.
There are many that would say Heller was an activist court making up law and completely overlooked precedent in Miller, in the same way the current court is overturning decades of precedent in another issue.
"United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes."
Am I the only person who has never even heard of half these products, let alone used them? If Apple can do something better than they can or their products weren't compelling enough for Apple (or similar) to buy them up, well... that's how the world spins.
FWIW: In my career doing this kind of work, I found logs to be archeologically interesting, but seldom of value. Products that claimed to do things with logs gave me skepticism, because they were often like trying to do brain surgery through your foot - better to just go straight to the head. That is to say, if you could replicate the problem, better to watch it via full-stack monitoring tools in real-time than wading through gigabytes (terabytes?) of log data after the fact, often which had a randomness to their shape (IE: consisted of whatever garbage some developer thought was useful long ago and far away).
If you knew exactly what to monitor and control, you would also have put in mitigations for the problem. Log analysis is for when something went wrong that you didn't anticipate, such as a security exploit. It's part of a post-incident investigation.
My point is log analysis is noise to the signal. A poor way to discern what went wrong or to proactively monitor to avoid an incident in the first place. There are loads of tools out there, some of which have been mentioned in this thread, that monitor from network to user to app layer and are superior for triage. If someone is down in the bowels of logs, it's gonna be a bad time. I spent a decade triaging high-profile incidents around the world and teaching organizations how to do this stuff.
The logs are what you have. It's like the investigation after a plane crash, where you have some black boxes, some radar images, observed distribution of wreckage, whatever. You probably don't have all the data you would like to, but you use whatever you can get your hands on.
Better tools for analyzing logs are fine, but the idea of some ML tool that you throw random logs through and have it automatically identify significant events seems like a pipe dream.
This is all true. So for the times you end up there, wouldn’t you prefer a tool to surface for you the things you were going to have to spend hours digging for?
I give you credit for working in this space and trying to create a more automated approach... I spent many years in the app performance world both as a consultant and working on products, so again - good on you.
For what it's worth, my immediate reaction is that you might work on different terminology in how you present what your product does. I get that you are trying to create a contrived example in order to demo the product and show value, and that can be a very difficult thing to do. That said, in my line of thinking, an HTTP 500 isn't actually the root cause, it's a symptom of the cause. The password being set incorrectly isn't the root cause either. The real root cause is something in the deployment pipeline, the configuration control, the change management, the architecture, etc, etc. that got us to this point.
I guess I'm struggling here a bit too because I think of how many times I would have been the manual version of this, where I would show information like this to a client's technical team, and I had to absolutely spoon feed them on how to remedy. I remember a team that was supposed to be crack guys from a vendor, an app team, etc who had been working on a problem for months that I fixed in a matter of hours because they just didn't understand what the line in the log meant. So it isn't clear to me how your product is actually creating better visibility + interpretation of the problem toward a solution.
In the ten or so years I did that kind of work, what really stood out to me was that the seemingly obvious tech issues were not obvious because of a lack of education / experience /training on the part of the client personnel, but more often than not the real problems were much much larger architectural issues way beyond just the message in the log. Those are much harder to both identify and correct, but products like yours and the ones you integrate with are almost just a band-aid on the problem.
So, take that for what it's worth - again, good work trying to improve the state of the art in this area.
We go back and forth on this as well. When I talk to people I will usually say something like “we find the stuff in the logs you were going to have to dig for, and surface it in a report on your dashboard”. I think the RCaaS is in that sense aspirational, and there’s a bunch of other stuff you’d want to do as well like integrate log and metric AD for example. I really appreciate your thoughtful comment and I think you’re right, we can still communicate better about this concept with the broader community. Pls do reach out if you’d be willing, Id love to pick ur brain over a drink or w/e. larry@zebrium.com
Further - you guys lurk all over HN commenting like this every time there's an interview thread. It's submarining and it's gross.