|
Share Bear posted:i dont program in my free time, why would i have a github can't answer this one Share Bear posted:why would any company willingly contribute to open source this is a lot easier broadly there are two reasons
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2025 16:26 |
|
|
Share Bear posted:i dont program in my free time, why would i have a github you sell a core but very flexible product that your consultants build custom tools that connect to it over the years through various engagements. you open source the tools so that as the tool becomes more popular customers fix bugs for you. e z p z
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 03:51
|
|
|
software companies build almost universally open source infrastructure these days because the economics are favorable. your software business will have a core competency and you'll have a whole bunch of infrastructural crap needed to make that core competency work. you can: 1. buy commercial software from a vendor. every dollar you pay your vendor for support is a dollar you're not making in profit. also the vendor's interests often do not align with yours. 2. build it in-house at great expense. which is not a good business proposition for things that aren't your core competency. 3. if it's something fairly small, make an open source seed of a solution and then see if some gullible bastard comes along and writes the rest of it for you for free. at this point there's a snowball effect: once an open source solution mostly exists, the economics favor taking that open source solution and adding some minor enhancements that your business needs. now you have an internal fork. at this point, you quickly discover that maintaining a private fork is a pain in the rear end. so now you "pay" the community in code and upstream your enhancements. this buys you "support" in the sense that the community now maintains your code instead of you, including keeping it up to date with other poo poo that's happening in mainline. but this pattern only establishes itself in solutions to infrastructural problems peculiar to companies that do a lot of in-house software development. which is why you don't see any non-laughable open source alternatives to, say, photoshop and autocad: the primary consumers of those products would love to pull adobe and audodesk's fangs out of their necks, but those companies are stuffed to the gills with graphic designers and engineers, not programmers. so the only open source competitors to those products are made by hobbyists, with all of the lack of focus and quality that entails. people thought hobbyist software would somehow magically take over the world. it never did; actually the hobbyist poo poo peaked and then slid hard after the early 2000s. a weird form of corporation-driven communism emerged instead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 05:33
|
|
|
I remember some guy stopping by my old workplace to do some presentation on open source basically he had a scanner you could use for projects to determine license strength to make sure you could commercialize your product, and he was pushing companies to open source products so they could externalize maintenance costs
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 14:10
|
|
|
startup investors promote open sores because it serves their interests on both sides of the startup life cycle - every startup can build on the existing tech commons and not spend the money to duplicate it - when a startup fails (as most do) it can leave behind any new general-purpose tech that it built for the next ones
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 16:00
|
|
HoboMan posted:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/48270127/can-a-1-a-2-a-3-ever-evaluate-to-true No modern es6 developer would ever rely on type coercion like that. Every set of linting rules is going to suggest the sane === operator instead of == Of course if the interviewer REALLY wants you to remember the type coercion rules, that’s a mark against them. Every language without hard breaks in backward compatibility is going to have a dirty basement, some times sometimes it’s non-generic collection libraries, sometimes it’s keywords that made sense in a bygone era of desktop development. You aren’t faced with it in day to day work in most languages but this is the language of the web But if we are breaking backwards compatibility in languages - Python 2! Celebrating ten years of depreciation and and also wide deployment! 
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 16:51
|
|
Valeyard posted:yeah, i would already be locked in. I have heard some horror stories on amazon but I am not sure how willing (in comparison) other places are to sponsor visas MS has a galaxy of desi body shops like WiPro and HCL and Tara but to your employer you really are just warm meat.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
the use of a lot of wide-scale contracting in enterprises always feels illegal to me but what do I know 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
why would it be illegal?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
because they're not actually independent contractors in pretty much all cases?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
like the last company I worked for had a huge contractor presence, and contractor vs employee was pretty much indistinguishable my thoughts were either a) this is somehow ok and I just dont know why or b) they were counting on nobody realizing this + being a large fortune 100 company with a big legal department, political power, and legal war chest
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:13
|
|
|
large percentage of contractors is a huge red flag
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
like on my team alone, it was my boss, myself, and 3 contractors the contractors and I did the same kinds of work at the direction of my boss, and as far as I could tell this was standard practice across the company -- management was employees, except on larger projects where there might be some substructure of a contractor acting in a more leadership role of some of the other contractors but with an employee manager on top, and then a mix of employees (keep the project knowledge available in-house) employees and onshore/offshore contractors of various sizes this also appeared to be standard practice for all the companies in the area, and some people even had little contractor businesses of their own that were working at our company (this changed later when the company decided to exclusively hire from the large firm where most of our contractors came from and didn't renew the smaller contractors, replacing them with staff from this larger company) the only things I could think of is -- maybe its ok because most of them work in a building across the street (but this also seemed to be motivated by not having enough space for employees so they would push the contractors out of the building, sometimes employees had to work in another building for the same reason -- no space), and their contracting firm managed all their PTO and benefits (but as far as I could tell they would still need to work with their employee manager to take that PTO)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
Going to try that 2 hour on-camera skills test thing again today. Hopefully the server will be up now?
Schadenboner fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Feb 1, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 17:38
|
|
The Management posted:large percentage of contractors is a huge red flag Anybody who’d been there a year was effectively senior. Funny thing, the company had put some sort of effort into making it a ‘fun’ place to work, ‘hip’ designed office, game consoles in the break room ... except it was a launch era Xbox 360 that had red ringer but was never replaced. * many of them living out of a suitcase, sleeping in a bathtub and sending every last dime home. Whatta world. What a world.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
sometimes contractors make sense, but their incentives are not aligned with the company. if you are getting paid to ship something but will be long gone by next year, you're not going to put too much effort into designing it to be maintainable and extensible so you aren't screwing yourself in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 19:43
|
|
 
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
The Management posted:sometimes contractors make sense, but their incentives are not aligned with the company. if you are getting paid to ship something but will be long gone by next year, you're not going to put too much effort into designing it to be maintainable and extensible so you aren't screwing yourself in the future. Also, it makes no sense at all for a contractor to make something that is simple for someone else to pick up. I know people who have been contractors for the same company for years and continually refused full time offers because they're the only guy who can maintain their systems. Think lowtax paying radium but paying twice as much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
PSA if job searching in japan dont tell the recruiter what you are currently making, they will just forward it straight to the company they are hooking you up with and then pretend to negotiate a good salary on your behalf - not all recruiters do this, but play it safe. i think lying to the recruiter so that they believe your actual desired minimum raise is what you are currently making should probably be standard opsec it seems though that the company will ask for some pay slip as verification of your last salary at some point in the interview process, which is hosed up, but if it is after they have already made an offer, it's probably not so easy for them to be huge assholes and lowball you - if they do decide to be assholes about it, you probably dodged a bullet anyway in other news a company has asked me to provide some person who would guarantee that the info on my resume is correct 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 12:36
|
|
|
Never disclose your current salary ever, anywhere. If they won't continue the process without knowing, it's never worth your time anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
what's a good interview question to get a manager to accidentally admit if they micromanage everything?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 17:22
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:what's a good interview question to get a manager to accidentally admit if they micromanage everything? same but republican
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 17:24
|
|
|
HoboMan posted:what's a good interview question to get a manager to accidentally admit if they micromanage everything? first two questions on the list should cover it. if they start talking about daily meetings, extremely specific metrics, and strange qualities expected out of employees then it's a bad sign. however this is also luck of the draw because who you end up working for directly may not have been involved at all in interviewing you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
don’t accept a job before speaking with your new immediate manager first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
qhat posted:Never disclose your current salary ever, anywhere. If they won't continue the process without knowing, it's never worth your time anyway. that's great advice but it works in the scenario where you do not need to trust the other party to some extent to even get the process started. japan is still a quite traditional environment and generally you do not find friends here by being someone who insists on breaking local customs and traditions that said, of course I gave a made up number to the recruiters when I started out here, it's just now when I am further in the process, it actually turns out they will ask you for the official pay slip
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
The Management posted:don’t accept a job before speaking with your new immediate manager first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 01:50
|
|
|
qhat posted:Never disclose your current salary ever, anywhere. If they won't continue the process without knowing, it's never worth your time anyway. this is over-broad advice. it's ok to disclose your current salary. just don't give it up without a fight. don't give it up just because they asked. give it up when it's time to negotiate, if and only if you believe the disclosure will improve your negotiating position.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:this is over-broad advice. it's ok to disclose your current salary. just don't give it up without a fight. don't give it up just because they asked. If you ever do give it up under the pretence that they're doing you a favour, it has to be a "this is my salary, but this is what I want" and you gotta be prepared to walk. Your current salary, at the end of the day, is utterly irrelevant in judging your value as an employee and you gotta walk if they judge it as something else.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 07:16
|
|
|
"I hear you're looking to sell a house" "That's right" "So could you tell me what you paid for it?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 07:34
|
|
|
“oh, base salary is just one component of my compensation package. my take home varies depending on how the stock is doing. let’s talk about what your total comp is”
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 08:25
|
|
|
The Management posted:“oh, base salary is just one component of my compensation package. my take home varies depending on how the stock is doing. let’s talk about what your total comp is” as ever the post/username combo
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
I sent a resume to a place these days and HR seems to be fumbling around because nobody even knew there was an embedded linux position in the company not sure what to think about this but maybe it's kind of a bad sign
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:"I hear you're looking to sell a house" Not a great analogy since that information is public
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
s/house/car/ and it works  actually no because cars never appreciate
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
qhat posted:If you ever do give it up under the pretence that they're doing you a favour, it has to be a "this is my salary, but this is what I want" and you gotta be prepared to walk. Your current salary, at the end of the day, is utterly irrelevant in judging your value as an employee and you gotta walk if they judge it as something else. you always have to be prepared to walk
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:"I hear you're looking to sell a house" this happens all the time, and sometimes it can be advantageous to the seller if you are at the last stage of a hiring process, dickering over salary, you may still have very different expectations about comp. if you ask for $170k, but they were expecting to pay $100k, the bitter pill will go down a lot easier after you mention you make $150k right now. all of a sudden your $170k ask looks like a pretty good deal. your current/prior salary can constitute social proof, and that can be useful leverage at the end of the process what you don't want to do is tell some hr flunky your current salary at the beginning of the process. at best, it anchors all negotiations to your current salary. at worst, it filters you out entirely because some beancounting moron already picked a salary band for the job. -- tl;dr: don't talk about money until you both agree that you're a great fit for the position
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:tl;dr: don't talk about money until you both agree that you're a great fit for the position this. plus remember, the further you are in the process, the more invested the recruiter and hiring manager are in pushing it through. a few grand over at the end is not that big a deal but at the beginning it could be a killer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:"I hear you're looking to sell a house" i see the advertised rent is xfiggies/mo but what i really want to know is how much was it before?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
ADINSX posted:Not a great analogy since that information is public also in the analogy there'd have been some improvements to the "house" since it was bought
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2025 16:26 |
|
|
asking for your last salary is partly negotiation tactic (leverage for them), and partly a hunt for social proof (leverage for you) as a job-seeker, try to avoid disclosure when it hurts you, and don't sweat it too hard when it helps you
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 20:57
|
|