Smaller companies if you want to work for free and have no benefits.
Big companies if you want the company to spend money on training you, good salaries, extra benefits and being to drop the job after going home for the day.
> Smaller companies if you want to work for free and have no benefits.
Maybe you mean startups? There are lots of small companies that pay very competitively and have great benefits. There are big companies where the pay and benefits are terrible along with forced OT or on call. I have worked at both.
I will take the small company over the big every single time, because in the small I have always been able to enact change to make things better (going as far as getting them to change the retirement provider to another one with better fund options). In a big company, even when it is clear there are problems, it can be almost impossible to push changes through.
Not even close to correct! I worked for a small company that paid me well and gave perks. I've also worked at a large company that didn't care for training and benefits.
The consent boxes are what GDPR will mean to most people in a few months. Deleting your data is a good thing, but that option has been available from the biggest data hoarders for years, and it's not exactly popular. In fact most users dont even know/care it exists.
But deletion hasn’t been available (and most “deletion” request functions have been in response to legal and governmental pressure already) and I recall seeing multiple stories about “deleted” material not being deleted.
Gdpr is a response to the prior attempts to let the industry “self regulate” not actually doing anything.
Does it over regulate? Personally I don’t think so - people talk about the complexity but that’s mostly due to the need to be absolutely explicit everywhere, and need to ensure that there aren’t loophole that can be abused by some company with enough lawyers.
The industry did do some things, for one internet giants are in a certain competition to appear privacy-conscious. For another, adtech did introduced some options (e.g. adchoices) but they were arguably too little. The thing is however people don't care about their privacy as much as their governments would like them to care, hence the regulation. But it's opinionated , extreme regulation meant to disrupt everything rather than fix the things that need fixing, and that never works.
The GDPR has a lot of clauses that seem nonsensical to an end user, but actually setup a situation where those data collectors must reveal the true extent of their data or risk massive penalties by having falsely disclosed..
Until now there was no way to guage the truth in anything they tell you and no penalties for lies.
I m not personally afraid of the data that commercial companies have collected on me , as i was consciously using their websites when i did . But it's more uneasy to think of the data collected by various security services. I am glad that GDPR is making people believe all their private data belongs to them (this is not true in modern states - government owns much of your data). At some point people are going to start asking questions about private data usage by governements. E.g. it is only a few years since governments started buying and using stolen private bank files to search for tax frauds etc.
The "consent or no dice" coercion will get fixed later on (2019 as it seems) with ePR [1]. Right now you have a choice to not use the platform. It isn't a fair choice (hence ePR) but its there. And, you have the choice to request your data. Its a big step up, but its not yet where it should be. Baby steps.
At least the EU does something about this data gathering mania (as for why, see Bruce Schneier's essay "Data is a toxic asset so why not throw it out?" [2]); the USA, for example, doesn't (yet). The USA just repealed net neutrality. Its good in a way because now we can watch the long term effects from the other side of the pond. I suggest Americans do the same with GDPR. Observe and learn from each other.
That's because they are so well hidden and not in the least bit advertised. We just all assume the worst of companies and generally are proven correct.
Last I checked one of the biggest datahoarders of all, facebook, did not actually delete your data when you told them to, instead the squirreled it away somewhere in a data warehouse just in case.
It's not so much the greatness of JS that attracts people, but having access to the DOM and browser based rendering. HTML/CSS is the very best possible declarative syntax for building interfaces ever devised really. The alternatives are way less flexible and cross platform.
HTML and CSS are actually a pretty terrible syntax for building interfaces, which is unsurprising given HTML is a document format, and CSS is designed to style documents. If they were really the best possible syntax, you wouldn't have so many popular frameworks.
Rather, HTML/CSS/JS is what you're stuck with if you're treating the web as your platform, which is tempting when your code is really just a front-end for a remotely hosted system anyway.
Electron is the result of people trained in web development turning their hands to desktop development, but not wanting to learn something completely new.
>Electron is the result of people trained in web development turning their hands to desktop development, but not wanting to learn something completely new.
"Learning something new" has a massive cost when you apply that to an entire engineering team. A tool that can leverage existing resources to make people proficient in a new area simply through new technology would be a huge value added IMO.
My argument basically comes down to the alternatives. Have you tried them? Native iOS development was a nightmare without deep mobile expertise until React Native and the like came about. Windows/Linux/Mac cross-platform apps were in the same place before Electron. IT's far from perfect, but ask anyone today what they'd prefer to build an interface with and it's most like HTML/CSS. Especially for highly graphic intensive, responsive layouts, there's almost no competition really.
> Native iOS development was a nightmare without deep mobile expertise until React Native and the like came about.
Doing things well requires expertise.
> Windows/Linux/Mac cross-platform apps were in the same place before Electron.
Seriously?! Qt predates Electron and is a far superior solution. Of course, if you only know web development, your existing knowledge doesn't translate over easily, but the reverse is equally true.
> but ask anyone today what they'd prefer to build an interface with and it's most like HTML/CSS
Only if they are already experienced in web development. Otherwise, Qt Quick is much better, taking the positives from CSS, without the downsides of using a document format to layout a UI.
> Especially for highly graphic intensive, responsive layouts, there's almost no competition really.
Seriously, Qt Quick is far better. Though on the desktop, you'd be better off not building a "highly graphic intensive, responsive layout" and instead adhering to the established norms.
Well, I think it would be pretty easy to take the best ideas from HTML/CSS and make something MUCH MUCH better that would be completely incompatible with these- See for instance subform (https://medium.com/subform) The problem with this of course is that these alternative systems aren't widely supported, but at some point I expect one of the AFGAMs to publish and push one of these alternate layout systems and attempt to get higher adoption.
>It's a trivial application that stores mostly already public data
So wtf are you worrying about then? Only shady companies are afraid of GDRP, the fact that you look at GDPR as a problem is a huge let down in trust for your company
That's a gross generalization. In fact, the parent explained quite well why GDPR can become a problem for smaller companies.
It's not the law itself that matters in this case but the clients' (quite possibly wrong) interpretation of that law. As of now, GDPR unfortunately leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
It's always funny to read these stories because I also got tired of the cheap android phones that filled up instantly. Bought a 400€ Nokia and everything just works meanwhile all my friends iphones have all kinds of problems with the hardware
Even if w3schools have fixed all these instances since then, that all those errors were ever produced is a bad sign, especially when there were better alternatives even then.
If you keep punishing someone for past mistakes there is no reason to improve.
On the other hand MDN is a mozilla resource and had good stuff from day 1 so they deserve the traffic.
EVEN AS A COLLEGE STUDENT I'm not going to do your coding assessment for free. There are plenty of workplaces that skip such bullshit and instead they talk with people and take a quick look at Github/past experience. I have more important things to do and recruiters keep emailing me about interviews every week.
> EVEN AS A COLLEGE STUDENT I'm not going to do your coding assessment for free. There are plenty of workplaces that skip such bullshit and instead they talk with people and take a quick look at Github/past experience. I have more important things to do and recruiters keep emailing me about interviews every week.
Great: I'm really pleased for you, and I hope you have a fulfilling career. But all you're telling me is that if you don't respond to the invitation I've sent you then you don't want the job I'm advertising that much. And guess what? I'm selecting against people who don't want the job I'm advertising that much.
Now here's an interesting thing that I've spotted before on HN: the silent majority have upvoted me, but a few commenters have taken me to task. Clearly I'm not suggesting that the majority are always right (the majority of people used to think the world was flat and look how that turned out), but it's certainly worth further consideration.
I think software developers have a very interesting relationship with the hiring process - there's an unspoken attitude that our skills are highly in demand, so therefore companies should be trying to hire us rather than us trying to get a job with a company.
In reality, while software development skills are in high demand, there's also a very high supply segmented across different skillsets and industries (and yes, in lots of industries being a software and domain SME is important). Companies have had lots of success using take home projects or short assessments for technical skills like HackerRank to separate both the wheat from the chaff and remove those who don't want that particular role that much (as you said).
Definitely. I don't think there's a one size fits all solution to hiring. Hopefully my suggestions will be helpful to those feeling swamped by applications, but it's certainly not the gospel.
At the moment we get few enough applicants that I'm fortunate enough to be able to talk to all of them. What has surprised me is that a relatively high proportion simply don't respond to that invitation. The numbers aren't yet anywhere near high enough to feel confident here, but it does seem - at least superficially - like there might be a correlation with weaker applications here.
Well, he was saying when he has too many applicants. Either he picks a few and gives none of the others a fair chance, or he gives everyone a fair chance with something some people don't like. Our time on this planet is finite, what do you expect of him?
Here's my input as an actual computer engineering student with good grades and who was hired after 2 years: I have no idea why professors wouldn't want students to collaborate on homework, forcing students to solve problems on their own will only create basement coders who can't cooperate with other people.
Not a single company has ever asked me to invert a binary tree/implementing any more complicated algorithm nor my grades, they have only cared about my personality and non-school projects.
Hell, we are encouraged to work together with other people at my university.
Big companies if you want the company to spend money on training you, good salaries, extra benefits and being to drop the job after going home for the day.