Yeah, show some promise for fuck's sake. Like Nip Alert, Big Head's app. It gives you the location of a woman with erect nipples. Now that's something people want.
Generally I respect people less for ostentatious displays of wealth (though a significant proportion of them have earned their money doing things I respect despite the sports car and bedrooms that outnumber even the guests).
Inverse snobbery is a very powerful thing too ;) But I'm probably an outlier
Money does correlate to happiness, so long as you have enough of it to live comfortably. Beyond that point, additional money does not increase happiness.
Yeah, that stuck out to me as well. Thinking like that is a sign that there may be larger issues at play here. Truly satisfied and happy people don't believe themselves to have been destined for greatness in any such manner - even though they may or may not be as "great" as anyone else. And conversely, truly "great" people, are often the benefactors of circumstance and luck more than anything else. Focusing on attaining the greatness that you were destined to achieve is a recipe for lifelong disappointment.
Not attempting greatness, because of risk of disappointment?...I feel something is missing there. I don't have any answers yet though. There must be a third way.
There's an important distinction between simply being ambitious about achieving greatness, and feeling as though you were destined, or meant, to achieve greatness. The former accounts for failure, while the latter does not.
I think I get it but in some countries age is not a privacy issue, business-wise. Actually, in some places (like Brazil) people expect you to disclose it, eventually. There's not much privacy protection about it like there is in US.
The weirdest is other countries where it'll be on the CV. Along with gender, ethnicity, religion, marital status, number of children(including their ages and names sometime) and a photo.
Its really uncomfortable since we're not supposed to use any of that.
Should you withhold information from your CV since some of it is known by you to not being supposed to be used by the reader of said CV?
Because CV without all what you listed is no longer a CV and is closer to a catalog listing. Should you also replace your name with some alphanumeric code? Because name can tell you a lot to discriminate on.
No not necessarily, though I wouldn't use a CV to apply to a job in the States or that is with a primarily US based organization. I just ignore the info when it comes up, it just catches me by surprise sometime.
I've actual lobbied to anonymize all applications as much as possible. Thankfully for some positions I have to review resumes for I'm unfamiliar with the cultural norms of what names are female and what are male. So in that way they are anonymized!
As with age, people are not expected to state their race in an interview, nor are employers allowed to discriminate based on race, yet this diversity report includes anonymized racial data. They could have easily included anonymized age data.
By the way, Judge Lucy Koh estimated that fees would be $82885000, so each of the 64466 class members would have received $3750, not quite the “essentially zero” that Alex at TechCrunch claims in the article you link.
Relative to the damage caused, sorry but $3750 (minus the regular income tax that will be levied on top of it) does in fact work out to "essentially zero".
It amounts to basically saying "Yeah, we artificially suppressed wages for years and years, sorry. But take this.... it is about what you would have made working for us for a week (at the suppressed wage level we created, lol!)".
The lawyers will make out really, well, though, which is why I'm generally anti-class action but happy that this decision was made.
Note how the plaintiff's attorney actually argued against this ruling (to protect their very large slice of the bird-in-the-hand pie). If they were acting for the right reasons they would be pushing for a much higher sum (even if it meant more risk) in the hope of causing sufficient punitive damage to the companies involved to really change behavior. $325.4 million split among these companies is peanuts.
$3750 is about a week's pay for a tech worker, so essentially zero.
Salaries jumped by about $30K/year when the pact collapsed, so the commenters above who are calling for the decimal point to shift a place to the right aren't all that unreasonable.
Assuming that is the true effect, it should probably 2-3x that in punitive damages otherwise the collusion was still a good idea, and next time it will be more adequately paranoid corporate types covering their asses instead of the self-assured Jobs forwarding evidence around with smileys.
I bet $3750 can barely cover one month of mortgage on a place in San Francisco. It's no small amount, but in the context of their location and cost of living it's a pittance.
Worse still, he starts with "design needs to stop with the feel-good bullshit", but ends with a bunch of save-the-world feel-good bullshit.
The fact that Silicon Valley has not solved the world's problems goes far far deeper than design, we're talking about fundamental problems of shareholder driven, Tayloristic style capitalism.
The example set for the in the article, Hugh Hewitt's interview with Zach Carter, is possibly the worst example the author could have used for ignorance in the media.
While ignorance in the media may or may not be an issue, this article does not demonstrate that it is.
Yes, it's possible to have a credible opinion on things even if you haven't read a select list of books that a Dick Cheney apologist has set forth.
Great, so now I have to maintain an updated LinkedIn profile, contribute to various open source projects on GitHub, sustain an active StackOverflow profile, and complete coding challenges on HackerRankX.
I hope the employer who hires me doesn't mind if I do all that on the clock!
I don't just question the ever-growing list of must-have profiles and time required to maintain them, but their value in general.
It feels like a sort of arms race to engineer and automate hiring.
It's generally agreed that actually sitting down and talking with a person is strongest source of signal [1] in the hiring model, but rather than focusing on that the model is continually stuffed with a growing set of noisy variables (profiles).
At what point does this filtering start identifying the best profile builders as opposed to the best or brightest employees? Does hiring become a full-on game of prep services and checklists of activities along the lines of college admissions?
I think the critical role for tech in recruiting is to help work out who to meet, not to replace the conversation. It's definitely an arms race to turn the 1000 resumes into 10 people to be interviewed, but I don't even know where to begin taking it past that realistically.
The first automation software for the full hiring process is a going to be a very well marketed solution, not necessarily an effective one.
Ideally, I would see less of a need for specialist recruiters as tech has made connecting with appropriate hires simple enough for someone from the team the hire will work with to conduct interviews.
There's already an element of SEO-style optimisation in resumes as it is. I have a few outside-the-box approaches on how to get around this and I'll be doing a Show HN once I have something together :)
Don't forget you'll also need to know Ruby, PHP, Python, Node.js, all .net languages, Javascript, HTML5, CSS3, Nginx, Linux, Nosql, MySQL, Photoshop, Art and Design, among other skills.
In my experience, the interview process for jack of all trades job descriptions plays out the same way every time.
1.) The candidate shows up with a effectively all the required skills. Predictably, logically, the candidate has a roughly average level of skill across the range on average.
2.) The interviewers decide the candidate won't do because he/she is 'only' average in some area that should have been one entry on a short list of required skills in the first place.
Either hire for the skills you actually need and be specific about it or hire the smartest, hungriest people you can find and be honest about what they'll be expected to learn.
3.) Applicant is hired, and paid criminally below-market with above-market stress, because the types of people who explicitly hire "jack of all trades" are generally trying to save money.
Can you prove that your support vector machine works properly, fed with data from Arduino sensors, and can you scale that onto a cloud network while integrating with Active Directory so that users can view their results in a single-page app?
It's OK. Maintaining a HackerRankX is just a subset of your ability to Google.
Anyway, I'd submit that's the real threat here... this sort of thing is easy to game, and you are talking about the group of people most capable of gaming even the smartest AI algorithm... The top end of the "leaderboards" is going to be a list of cheaters pretty quickly.
While this may be uncomfortable for you, please understand that the absolute majority of people in the world is much worse off than you.
And while contributing simultaneously to github, stackoverflow and others community projects could be cumbersome for you, positive externalities are immense. The whole ecosystem benefits from this.
Even if this burden is too heavy, there are always options of 4-day working week, freelance work, project-based work, etc. etc. Programmers are lucky to enjoy most liberty from their profession.
So come on, don't complain, you DON'T HAVE to do anything, unless you want to be the very best.
This is not about projects and work that help other people, but doing this for future employers an a career, not out of altruism for others. For example you didn't bring up a linked in profile in your list of things.
Arguably there are better things that programmers can do with their talent, not just for themselves but for the world, than updating social media websites and building a personal online image.
I consider the activity of updating stackoverflow and github with new knowledge and code to be incredibly good for the world. The need to update Linkedin and other resume-like social media website is just an inevitable consequence to the (prisoner dilemma)-like evolution of the credentials game.
Yes, at the end of the day, software developers have it pretty good in the current job market.
Sometimes it gets a little ridiculous on the requirements/wants on job postings. Some companies just ask for the world; it can lead to impostor syndrome and it can be stressful.
