I'm way less upset by this than a large number of people in that twitter brawl. I can agree that this probably isn't the best way to go about things, but in the end, all I see is a CEO taking a firm stance of confidence behind his products - let's just hope this doesn't turn into a real bad situation for namecheap customers. Ballsy? Yeah. But pitchfork and torch worthy? Not really.
I've never run into someone who that is their career - do you work for companies that are trying to take the competitions stuff apart, or legacy hardware, or is there some other stuff that's obvious that I'm missing?
Think more along the lines of "bad guys" vs "good guys" rather than corporate competition. Perfectly harmless systems are built everyday. But, the consumers of those systems may not always be harmless. Understanding - and eventually controlling - the inner workings of these custom systems [covertly in some circumstances] is often necessary to stop the bad guys.
If the task at hand were considered to be bowling pins at the end of a lane, and the ball rolling down the lane is me working towards completing that task, music is the lane bumpers that keep me focused and working towards the objective. Otherwise, every noise, conversation, and item on my desk would throw my focus (the bowling ball) into the gutter.
Want to add - the T1 helpdesk guy who has the ticket to install some rando software on some rando employee's computer is not going to know why. If you do intend to go this route, ask a decision maker, not the messenger (installer).
Serious question - Isn't the company opening themselves up to more litigation by ghosting? For instance, doesn't a hiring company have to have a legitimate reason for not hiring someone, otherwise they're opening themselves up to a discrimination lawsuit? "Because you gave me no reason as to why you didn't hire me, I'm now left to believe it was based it was on my ethnicity, which is illegal. So here's a lawsuit."
I'm not a lawyer, just an MBA. But I believe it's the same principle as the famous "Shut The Fuck Up" advice for talking to cops. You have to incriminate yourself to be liable. If you don't say anything then you're presumed innocent (barring other evidence), and saying anything does you no favours.
I'd be more inclined to give it a try if there were videos demonstrating it being used. Either on the project's website or YouTube. Otherwise, this looks like a great idea + project
Seems very useful. However, I am not a fan of a subscription-based model for this sort of thing. I would hands down sign up if it was a one-time transaction. If that were the case I would also likely be a repeat customer every year.
We do see people activate the subscription for a few months, and then cancel their plan to downgrade back down to the Free Basic tier. The Free Basic tier sends ongoing Exposure Reports, so if they start to see more profiles pop back up, they re-activate. Others activate the subscription for a few months, then cancel, and then completely delete their account, and we destroy all info we have about the user at that point.
An "Intro to Logic" (Pseudocode) class was required at my university before you could move on to any of the actual programming courses. It was a glorified linear programming course - think BASIC or BATCH with a bunch of jumps and goto's.
This is unironically a good idea. The main stumbling block isn't programming per se, it's breaking down a conceptual, informal idea of what you have to do in a formal language.
It matters very little whether it's linear programs, ASM instructions, LISP forms or C++ classes.
On the other hand, our University course started with half-baked explanation of what "public static void main" means (Java entry point) on the first day. It was horrible and no one understand anything until a few classes later we go to the meat of making/building stuff.
Yeah, I probably already commented on this some time ago, but I think Java is really, really bad as a teaching language. The language itself is just fine and much better than most people give it credit for, if you are a professional developer. As a teaching language is full of cerimony and it forces upon you an object model that you can't fully understand until much later. It's too much "in the weeds", if that makes sense.
Yea, AFAICT, Java has fallen off in schools in favor of Python, which is less opinionated about things like that. It has classes if you want them, lambdas if you want them.
