Completely agree. "Where are you?" is basic information when location is at all relevant, and site designers frequently make the false assumption that every visitor is a local who knows exactly what you meant.
And it's not just news sites -- I once made a service reservation at a Toyota dealership in another state because it had the same name as the one I wanted and no indication of where it was in any global assets (it was buried on a "directions" page).
Ugh, I'm getting real tired of these snotty drive-bys masquerading as insightful criticism. Many job posts call for familiarity with Twitter Bootstrap, so is it proper to call out the applicants (or "kiddies," as the author derides) for responding in kind? It's bogus. And trashing applicants for internships is a bridge too far.
As an applicant, you'd be stupid not to target your resume with buzzwords based on trends you see in job descriptions. You are trying to get past the recruiter, who is literally going to crosscheck buzzwords on your application with those in the description.
To call applicants kiddies for playing that game the way it's supposed to be played... well, it's just seems naive.
We put things in our job listing like, "familiarity with Backbone required". Is Backbone a buzzword? Is someone who uses Backbone less of a developer? Should I just automatically assume that anyone with developer after their name knows Backbone? Will this list of dumb, rhetorical questions ever end?
The author of this post gets it completely wrong:
"Claiming Bootstrap as evidence that you 'know' development is like claiming that changing your oil means you 'know' automotive engineering."
Knowing Bootstrap does count as knowing development, whether Paul likes it or not. There's quite a bit to Bootstrap, and even if it only takes someone a couple of days to come up to speed with it, maybe I don't want to pay for those couple of days. Maybe I don't have a couple of days.
Knowlege is a continuum. Once you gain a little, it's easy to look at everyone beneath you with a sense of contempt, but what's the point? What do you gain? Better yet, what are you giving back to the world? If we accept the author's message in whole, what action can we take to better ourselves? Sorry, but I can't see any dramatic improvement if we all stop asking about Twitter Bootstrap tomorrow.
Atacrawl nailed it when he called this a, "snotty drive-bys masquerading as insightful criticism".
Agreed - I see many job listings these days that mention knowledge of Twitter Bootstrap...you'd be stupid as an applicant not to mention being familiar with it given its pervasiveness. It helps you get by the HR filter, where the resume is what matters, which might mean littering it with terms that would otherwise be banal to the typical good developer.
I use Stack Overflow (and to a lesser extent, Google) to help me with problems large and small all the time. Why break your neck to find a solution without finding out if someone else already did? There's never a point when you can't learn from others.
There's nothing wrong with learning from others, but you want to make sure you're actually learning. That means going through the StackOverflow answer and making sure you understand all the API calls involved, what they do, how you just combined them, and where to go to find documentation on them.
If you do that you'll get really good at your technologies really fast. If you just copy & paste the answer you'll have solved exactly one problem, and then you'll have to Google again for your next problem.
The question is, are you really learning? How much of that copy/pasted solution sticks with you a day or a week from now? The fact is we are missing the benefit of building up expertise that used to go along with spending time researching (through docs) and problem solving. When every problem is a google search away, there is a ceiling to how much expertise one can build up this way.
Edit: the reflex downvoters will be the end of this place.
Some solutions aren't worth committing to memory. Do I really need to remember all the flags on scp just to write a quick bash script when someone has already posted the correct incantation on StackOverflow?
Do you have to google it every time? The fact that repeated googling is required is a sign that something is off--either you're not growing from your experience or the API has too much friction. I've often felt this way when it comes to linux command switches. Just accepting that having to google everything is OK is the wrong answer here.
I always tell people that if it's worth memorizing because you use it a lot, you'll probably memorize it because you use it a lot anyway. If you have to make a point to memorize something, it's a hint to consider if it's worth the time.
I don't think people should put in effort to memorize things like command line switches. The issue I'm arguing against is accepting that we must now google everything to get work done. I agree that if its worth memorizing, you should eventually commit it to memory through repetition. The problem is that sometimes this doesn't happen. This is a sign of a problem, likely with the interface you're interacting with. If we accept the expectation is to just google everything, no one will ever stop to ask whether the interface itself is broken. If we accept that one should develop a mastery of their environment over time, then incentives form to improve ease-of-use, elegance, and "memorizability".
Definitely +1 for both "Thinking Too Far Outside the Box" and "Mysterious and Complex Navigation." I experience way too much of each on a regular basis. A message I try to drill home is "people don't come to websites to be wowed, they come to either learn about something or buy something."
Alternatively, it makes it sound like you are utterly incapable of just calling something what it is, you have to stick your trademarks all over it.
It's like when companies insist on calling common things by Special Names™ all over their documents instead of just writing like Normal People™ so they can have some Strange Monopoly™ over their terms.
One of Facebook’s board members is an investor in FiftyThree.
This line tells the whole story. This isn't just the case of a large company perhaps not noticing another product in the digital space with the same name. This is very deliberate, and the CEO comes across as flabbergasted with Facebook's decision.
That’s a great one. Better than what I used to say, which wasn’t even an analogy - that it’d be no different than a graphic designer supplying a hand-drawn/inked/painted sheet of paper, unscanned, for comping.
Love it, that's something everybody can understand. I might rephrase it as "doesn't know about sewing" though, as you don't need the practical skill itself but have to understand the limitations of different techniques.