|
psydude posted:TBH if I were hiring an intern or a Jr. Network Engineer I wouldn't care if they answered "incorrectly" as long as they got the basics down. Because even if they have a CCNA, they probably won't know any of that poo poo unless they've worked in a datacenter or large enterprise network before, even if they were previously working in a networking position. If someone has a CCNA and can't answer a basic question about addressing behavior at layer 2 and layer 3 then I would question their learning ability because that is covered to death on the test, and their ability to pass the test but not actually know a major portion of the material would be a pretty big red flag.
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
Tab8715 posted:It's driving me mad at the moment, when I go home I'll screw around with packet tracer. I was trying to find some diagram similar to your scenario but I don't know how you'd configure the interfaces between the two routers. I'm not sure what your confusion here is. If the routers are communicating over Ethernet then the IP packets are encapsulated into Ethernet frames, which include the source and destination MAC addresses in the frame header. Because the source and destination on that segment are the two routers the MAC addresses are the routers addresses, while the IP headers have the original source and destination IPs. Just because routers make routing decisions at layer 3 doesn't mean that they just get to bypass layer 2. If they are communicating over Ethernet then they will be in frames and those frames with have MAC addresses in the source and destination fields.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:As usual nipplefloss puts way more effort into this than I did, but if you don't understand how IP still has to travel in ethernet packets, wellllll I am a compulsive explainer. It is a problem.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Eonwe posted:Still, You should basically ignore the requirements in the job listing for any IT job. If it sounds like something you want to do, and think you can learn to do, then apply. It's their job to screen you, not yours. If you actually meet the listed requirements for a job then you're over-qualified. Such is the nature of IT hiring.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 22:42
|
|
at nearly every "entry level" job I find being "3+ years at random technology."
|
psydude posted:That's why I said "basics." They don't need to know how addressing schemes are set up and translated for web applications in a load-balaced datacenter. No one else was talking about load balancers or NAT though. Just a basic question about layer 2 and 3 addressing. That said, no matter how many intervening devices there are if someone whiteboards the traffic flow I'd expect any level of network admin to tell me the source and destination Mac at each hop.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Flipping the script in those sorts of questions isn't a solution. The answer doesn't matter, just the process you use to get there. If you ask what type of 747 they will tell you to pick whichever you prefer. If you ask if you should include space x,y, and z they will tell you yes. It's GOOD to ask those sorts of questions because it lets the interviewer know that you want to get the parameters right, but won't it get you off the hook for answering. It's very possibly they don't have a correct answer or even a good estimate, they just want to see if you can reason through the problem in a way that makes sense. They just want to learn how you think and whether you're capable of making headway at tackling difficult problems, or if you just freeze up and decide it's impossible. Of course this presupposes that the interviewer knows what they are doing and isn't just mimicking what they heard Google does, which is not a given.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:...no, I haven't thought about this poo poo at all. Why do you ask? There's an interesting book on the genesis and growth of these sorts of interview questions called "Are You Smart Enough to Work at Google." One of the points he makes in the book is that these sorts of questions can alienate good candidates for jobs, but that companies like Google or Microsoft can afford to alienate some good candidates because they get so many extremely bright and qualified applicants that a false negative here or there isn't a big deal. Smaller, less desirable companies need to be more careful because the pool of candidates they get to choose from is much smaller. The other point the book makes is that candidate screening is a horribly inexact art. It's incredibly difficult to tell just from a few interviews whether a person will be a good fit for your company, for the team they will be working on, for the specific job they will be performing, and for the next few years as things change. References can be fudged, interviews are often more about personality and conversational style then actual job ability, resumes are often outright fabrications...and even if the person is %100 percent truthful and has been excellent at previous jobs that doesn't mean they will be excellent in THIS job. These sorts of questions are just one more tool to help determine cultural fit. Can this person think on their feet? Can they ask they right questions when presented with an inexact requirement? Do they panic? Do they become irate? Yes, they are stupid questions with little relation to their actual job function, but that's part of the point. If you spend any significant amount of time in IT you will find yourself being asked stupid, difficult questions that are only tangentially related to your job on a pretty regular basis, and if your reaction is to turn into a sarcastic, pedantic, rear end in a top hat then you probably aren't going to be a good employee. They aren't a silver bullet or anything, but it's good to know how to answer them because you may get asked this type of question at some point in your job search.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:They may be able to afford more false negatives than smaller companies, but it's telling that Microsoft stopped asking those questions anyway. No reason to continue actively alienating great people when you know it's happening. As for the rest of it, yeah, I know that a large part of the question is gauging a candidate's response to the unexpected and their adaptability. But again, it apparently wasn't giving them better results. To be clear, I don't think that the questions are particularly useful for determining if someone is a good applicant. Google admitted as much recently (also useless are GPAs, transcripts, test scores, and non-structured interviews, generally). But that doesn't mean that you won't get asked one on a job interview somewhere, by someone who hasn't gotten the memo, and it's good to know what they are looking for and how to answer them. Part of the appeal of those sorts of questions is the shock value, and if you are expecting the question and are prepared then you can generally just breeze through them. After all, the purpose of an interview is to convince the interviewer that you can do the job, not to prove that you can actually do the job. So if they think the question is meaningful then knowing how to respond to it is a good thing, even if you think it's stupid. And no, I wasn't singling you out with the comment about people getting abrasive or pedantic, it was just a general statement.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
three posted:I do not understand why anyone cares if someone gets to work five minutes later than 8:00 unless people are literally waiting on them. I'm always puzzled by the idea that productivity in IT is measured in most organizations by how much time you spend at a desk (generally doing completely non-productive things like reading forums or shopping on Amazon) rather than things that directly effect IT operations like system uptime, mean time to resolution, timely completion of project milestones, etc... I once had a manager use the terms "theft" and "payroll fraud" when discussing me coming in to work a few minutes after 8:30 and taking more than an hour for lunch. I made it six months at that job before moving on.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2014 19:21
|
|
.
|
Moey posted:The real question is how to get a clearance (easily) without a military background. There's no trick to it. Just find a company that is willing to sponsor you and let you work with a provisional clearance until your permanent comes through. And hope you don't get denied.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:No but from my professional experience it seems to me that all the virtualization engineers that I know also have a CCNA/MCSA/etc yet most others certs tend to be enough one their own for a single position. Large scale data center virtualization is a new enough field that most people working as virtualization engineers got their start elsewhere. Virtualization also sits at the intersection of a lot of disciplines so knowing how to work with storage, networking, and hosts is pretty important to being good at the job.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
psydude posted:That's surprising. Most big defense contractors don't seem to give a gently caress about their employees. My experience has been that if you're working for the prime on the contract then they will probably treat you reasonably well and you may even be classified as a permanent employee rather than an hourly contractor. I work with a lot of LMCO contractors for a contract that LMCO owns, and they are basically all but un-fireable and get moved around to other LMCO contracts pretty easily if they request it. The NG sub-contractors are also treated fairly well, especially the leads and managers. But contractors that work for smaller subs are generally considered expendable and will be the first ones let go during RIFs, irrespective of job performance.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Sepist posted:I have google voice and my regular #, work has my google voice #. It forwards to my regular phone but you have to press some funky number dickery before the call is accepted so that you can field the callers. Come on it's 2014 bitches. Ditto. I can also set google voice to DND when I don't want to be bothered and work calls will go straight to VM without ringing, while personal calls to my regular # will go through.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
I don't get too many after hours calls anymore either, and if I do it's because something is seriously broken, but I still like having Google voice so I can distinguish between work callers and personal callers prior to picking up. And I have experienced an outage before, but if the poo poo is hitting the fan then work e-mail is blowing up and I'll notice that on my phone so I'm not too worried about it. Then again, I don't have a formal on call and if I don't answer they just call support.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Even at places where PTO is slotted based on tenure it is still negotiable. Do you really think that new VP they just hired away from some competitor only gets two weeks because he's a new employee? The trick is convincing them that you're worth making an exception for. Likewise, if more salary up front isn't an option perhaps they can grant stock, or write performance escalators into your contract. No harm in discussing it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
The single best thing you can do in the short term is get help with your resume. You need to get to the interview and the biggest factor to getting past the initial screening is a stand out resume. You can't quickly fix your lack of experience, and that's working heavily against you, but if you can get an interview then maybe you can convince them to take a shot on you. And to get an interview you'll need a great first impression, I.E, resume. Beyond that, keep picking up new skills and find ways to demonstrate them. If you wrote a script or program to solve a problem, make it publicly available and include that information on your resume (sort of a portfolio). Join local user groups and make friends. A lot of IT job opportunities come up because you know the right person. Apply to everything you're interested in, and try to establish relationships with some recruiters who will keep you in mind for openings they find.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2014 05:53
|
|
|
The fact that they haven't found anyone to fill the position yet, and that none of the internal candidates they did approach wanted it, would indicate that they probably don't want to pay market rate, much less above market rate. If they were willing to pay that they probably would have already found someone who wanted the job. That's not to say that you can't ask, but their inability to fill the position doesn't imply desperation, it implies that they don't view it as a compelling need to get it filled immediately. If they did they would have thrown more money around.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
swampcow posted:Huh? It's not a raise, it's a change in position. That's a really important distinction. HR departments that aren't dumb will know that with all else equal, you take the guy who has demonstrated that he can do his current job well and is not a crazy person. My wife works in HR. You wouldn't believe how many times there are hosed up personnel problems with a company as small as 500 people. If they promote internally they still have to back-fill his position, so it's not like they get to avoid hiring an unknown quantity. Additionally, they know his work history in detail, they know his salary history, and they know his weaknesses. Those things work against you in a salary negotiation where you're trying to sell the best possible version of yourself and you're often doing it based on the fact that the interviewer has incomplete information so you can sell your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
swampcow posted:If the company is trying to fill a more senior position, then they would probably prefer an unknown quantity in the junior position that the applicant currently fills. I'm not really sure what I'm making excuses for, as I'm not the one who is trying to negotiate a salary above market rate for a job I wasn't even offered yet after not even being approached initially as an internal candidate and having less than a year of time at the company. None of that sounds like a recipe for making a successful negotiation, which isn't to say that he's wrong or shouldn't try, it just seems like an overabundance of optimism at this point. There is a truism (that is probably mostly true) that it's easier to make more money by changing jobs than by staying with your company. There are a lot of reasons why that might be the case, but it's common enough that people remark on it often (after all, if it wasn't true then attractive counter-offers would be the norm, not the exception). To a certain extent your own company is often hoping that you will take a hometown discount on your raise, or on an offer of a new position, because they hope you will weigh the uncertainty of going to a completely new company and decide it isn't worth all of that extra money. They also assume that they can get someone to do your job for about what they are currently paying you because, after all, they got you to do it. Position changes are rarely negotiated in a blank slate and your current salary will very often be a baseline for discussion. "We'll bump you up 20% to take on these new responsibilities" versus "we will pay you $80,000 a year to come on board as a sysadmin." If you have limited experience and wouldn't normally even be a candidate for the position if you were an outside applicant (like, say, you have less than 1 year on the job and they want 3 or 4) that will affect the amount they are going to be willing to pay you. You're also making some erroneous assumptions about soulless corporate environments, ESPECIALLY government contracting. There is generally so much money being thrown around, and so many levels of middlemen, that getting raises can be pretty easy, especially if you hook up with the right sub. I got two $10k raises in less than a month for doing basically nothing when I was on a government contract. The guy across the hall from me doing the SAME job, but employed through a different sub, got a .5% raise every year for 3 years because that's just what his sub did. It's a completely crap shoot and also isn't indicative at all of what you can expect in smaller companies where budgets aren't done in hundreds of millions of dollars, and where those dollars aren't actually tied to making or selling anything. Your experience of just magically getting raises without having to do much isn't the norm, sadly. As far as hiring from within, there are obviously many benefits to doing so and companies would generally prefer to do that, but that doesn't mean they're going to pay an internal candidate more than an external one. It might seem like it should work out that way, rationally, but hiring and compensation aren't rational enterprises. If they were we wouldn't have these discussions about how to negotiate the best salary because a company would just inherently see your worth and give you what you deserve (whatever that means).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
swampcow posted:He said the job hasn't been filled yet. His observation about supply and demand may be true. If that's the case, he absolutely can try to ask for 10% more. What are they gonna do, fire him on the spot for being so bold? Both you and he have the logic of supply and demand backwards. Demand for the job is likely low because the price is wrong. That doesn't give him leverage to ask for more, it means that the company isn't willing to pay more or they would have seen more demand and likely filled the job already. To put it another way, if they were willing to pay 10% above market (or even market average) they probably would have filled this position long before an unsolicited internal applicant got this far in the hiring process. He should ask for whatever his happy number is, and should also be prepared to be disappointed. As for the rest, yes, you should ask for raises. No one ever said you shouldn't. But if asking for raises worked as often as you seem to think it does you'd see a lot more happy people in this thread. And as Misogynist said, there can be unintended consequences to asking for a raise, or a promotion, and you should be mindful of what you're signaling when you do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:I have no statistics on the matter. But I've NEVER heard advice to the tune of "be careful asking for a raise because you might get fired" before today. You still haven't, because no one here has said that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 04:22
|
|
|
Che Delilas posted:Yeah, they used phrases like "sets the clock in motion" and "light fuses." You can be a pedant if you want. He wasn't talking about being fired, he was talking about signaling that you're unhappy with your compensation and will thus, likely, be job hunting. Your current employer knowing that you are unhappy and looking for something else *can* have negative consequences. If they think you have one foot out the door you're unlikely to get the same consideration that your peers might.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Depending on how your storage backend functions you also need to consider that different IO patterns can conflict with each other and cause additional latency. For instance your random DB read IO is going to break up the relatively sequential pattern of logging so that logging runs more slowly than if it was on dedicated drives. Modern SANs are pretty good at making smart decisions about how to distribute multiple threads of IO activity so that this isn't generally a problem, especially with RAM and SSD being used for caching, but host raid cards aren't smart and can definitely benefit from different raid groups for different types of IO. On consolidated, virtualized environments it's often less useful because all of the virtual disks or LUNs are often sharing the same pool underneath. But the separate IO queues that multiple LUNs get you can make a difference as well. And, of course, there can be space management considerations. evol's comment about slow transaction logging showing down the whole DB is also important. I see a lot of people put logs on slow disk on the assumption that it's less important than the DB files, but DB files are far less sensitive to latency than logging. Logging can often function fine on SATA because it's sequential, but all things being equal it's much more important that transaction log IOs be serviced quickly from disk since they are synchronous whereas much of the DB file IO is asynchronous and also highly cacheable in RAM or SSD. I generally put logs and tempdb on the fastest disk available just to be safe, and because they are often relatively small.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:This is vague and may not be the right solution but... Assuming you're only interested in writing to the DB at one location and just need to be able to query both you could use SQL 2012 with always on availability groups. The secondary DB copy would be a read only copy. As far as how the order of querying works, that would properly be built in at the application layer rather than the database layer. If you want to be able to write to either location and still keep the DBs in sync then you're looking at a much more complicated (and expensive) solution.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:It's actually the second posting that I had a question about- is it really common for companies to want people to do both sysadmin and network administration duties? This is for a small credit union with about 8 branches, for reference. At the SMB end of the spectrum it's quite common for there to be a lot of overlap between network admin, sysadmin, application admin, and everything else.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Hughmoris posted:In my mind, if I can create something that no one else on the team understands, that enhances my value. Honestly, doing that makes you an rear end in a top hat. When I was a lead I had to seriously consider firing a guy because he kept "solving problems" by creating convoluted scripts or hacked together solutions instead of using off the shelf products with support or building something replicable and easy to maintain. He was incredibly smart and his solutions worked, but he didn't document them, he didn't build them with long term support in mind, he didn't consider whether it was appropriate to expect other team members to understand what he was doing. When he left we spent months trying to clean up all of the little time bombs he had left and getting everything standardized and supportable. Incomprehensible complexity is not a good thing in IT and you shouldn't actively strive for it. When you die in a para-gliding accident or whatever your co-workers will show up at your funeral to spit on your grave.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
There are easier ways to make 100k than living in a warzone. That's not even an outrageous salary for a senior *whatever* in a relatively low cost of living area. You don't have to be a wizard to make 100k a year, you just have to have some experience, some ability to negotiate, a baseline level of competence, and a the willingness to look at a lot of job postings and talk to a number of recruiters. I know people who are sitting right around 100k who are, frankly, in the bottom 50% of IT employees I've ever met. And people who are making less than them who are much much better at their jobs. How much you make has a lot more to do with how well you negotiate, and no small measure of luck regarding when you enter the job market.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
psydude posted:Right, but remember that $92,000 of what you make is tax free, so that's about another $30k on top of that. And if you're in a market where $100k is "easy" (one of the big tech markets), your yearly cost of rent for a 1br apartment will be between $1200-2000/mo, so make it an even $20,000 saved in housing. So, in a place like the DC area, $150,000 in salary overseas will very easily equal $200k or more. So that $150,000 is actually $150,000 in your pocket. And, back in the day, this could be made in an entry level position. A couple of years ago, the "senior" positions you're talking about were starting at $250k and going up to $300k+. I live in Portland. It is definitely not a high cost of living area, and yet I know people who make that contracting (with benefits) to DOD, utilities, Nike, Intel, etc...There are other places that similarly haven't exploded with tech money and driven cost of living way, way up, where this is also possible, and those places are in a country where you are relatively unlikely to be killed by a car bomb. And yes, the overseas money is basically tax free, but the purpose of money is to improve your quality of life, and if you're living in a Iraq or Afghanistan your qualify of life is pretty low. For less than $250k a year I just don't see it as being worth it. I would do it even for that amount because I'm quite happy with what I make and where I live, but I can see the appeal for others. quote:
Not really. Sometimes you're just going to get screwed by timing, and that is true whether you want to work in the US or in a combat zone. As mentioned, contractor bill rates have gone way down in those countries while the IT market is opening up again and hiring more in the US. It makes even less sense to do it now when salaries there are lower and hiring here is on the rise, meaning that salaries are also on the rise. My point is simply that if you view 100k as some mythical unattainable number for all but a select few you're wrong. It's certainly doable in the US, and without living in a one room dirt shack costing $2000 a month. Tab8715 posted:Why not? The things I want and the things I want to do cost money. In all honesty, if I owned a home I'd probably just work part time - that'd be something at 30. If anyone can hook me up with a contract Iraq/Afgan position, feel free to to shoot me a PM. Owning a modestly priced house isn't the sort of thing you semi-retire on. YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Huh? Portland is no SanFran or NYC but it ain't cheap. You can get a 2BR apartment within 10 miles of the city center for less than $1000 a month. There is reliable public transit that covers the entire metro area and for a lot of the city full time bike commuting is an option. There is no sales tax. Portland is pretty cheap for a mid-sized metropolitan area. It's not middle of nowhere cheap, but it's not very expensive given the amenities available. Maybe 10% more expensive than the national average? I moved here from Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and did not notice a significant increase in cost of living. quote:Why not? Because you have a lot of other bills beyond *rent* to live (even just maintaining a house is expensive) and as you get older those bills will increase (particularly health care, which won't be covered by your employer if you aren't employed full time, and god forbid you have kids) and you might actually want to save some money to actually retire so you aren't working until you're dead. You can pull off the part time work thing later in life when you're a well established and trusted consultant and your bill rate is $200/hr, but very likely not at 30.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
HatfulOfHollow posted:You can find an apartment in NYC on the outskirts of Brooklyn or in Queens for less than $1000. However your commute will be complete poo poo and you won't be living in the best neighborhood. That's not really true. Like, if you're thinking about DC or NY or the bay area it is expensive to live there, period, because housing is expensive almost everywhere except where you would literally be living in a crack den. You can find a 1BR within downtown Portland for $1200 or so. You can find housing within Portland proper in safe neighborhoods with plenty of local amenities for less than $1000. You can find even bigger places in the suburbs just outside of the city where you're still a 20 minute ride light rail ride from downtown for less than $1000. It's simply not that expensive a place to live, there are no really torturous commutes, and the whole area is fairly neighborhood focused so you're almost always near plenty of things. $100k in Portland goes a long way (as it should, since it's twice the median). It's also worth mentioning that many of the IT employers in the area are located outside of the city proper. Places like Intel and Nike and Oracle are in the suburbs and relatively inexpensive communities have grown up around them. No, it's not going to be like living in Manhattan, but then neither is living in Afghanistan or Iraq, which was the comparison. But you'll still be within a short distance of shopping and groceries and theaters and most of things a person requires to live. YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Comradephate posted:Is anyone else here confused why NippleFloss keeps saying that everyone else is saying that $100k is a lot of money, when everybody else is talking about $150k-$300k? I know I am. It was a response to this post: Tab8715 posted:but, you need a security clearance... and the ensuing conversation about whether or not it's actually worth working over there for *some* amount of money. As far as making $300k, I'm not sure much of anyone is doing that in Iraq or Afghanistan anymore. But as someone said, is it worth trading away a year of my life for that? Nah, not for me. I'm happy where I am making what I make and I'm comfortable with my opportunities to make more money without living in a shithole. YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Jul 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:Can I post about how I get sad when I see entry-level postings that have a TS/SCI requirement? There is a difference between a job requiring a TS/SCI and a job requiring an ACTIVE TS/SCI. If they need someone to come in quickly and begin working they may require an active, but if they are just adding staff to an existing team or staffing up for an upcoming project the contractor may be willing to sponsor you. Be sure you're not ruling out jobs that require it just because you don't already have one.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Just that it's too much relative to the median income. Most IT workers make more than the median income anyway, and there's some opportunity cost with being in a "cool" city on the coast with good weather. But that, given the median income, that's a lot of money for an apartment. It may not be possible to find one cheaper in Portland, and the numbers say the cost of living is fairly low there in general (food a lot cheaper? I'm not sure), but $1k for an efficiency or 1BR is at least 50% higher than other cities with comparable median incomes. Portland has a strict urban growth boundary and a lot of green space which limits the amount of real estate available in the city proper, driving up prices some. The flip side is that it doesn't sprawl and it's relatively easy to get from one place to another, and you're often very close to amenities. It's very easy to cut costs by using your car less, or simple go carless. The mild weather keeps heating and cooling costs relatively low. No sales tax saves money. Or you can live cheaper in the burbs and still rely on public transit to get around reliably in addition to driving. It's not the best city in the world, but like Raleigh or Minneapolis or San Antonio it's a place where you can find pretty good paying jobs and a high quality of life without having to deal with the exorbitant costs or commutes associated with NOVA or the bay or NYC.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
I like when a candidate who says "I don't know" is able to relate the topic, conceptually, to something they do know. If I've asked a VMWare question maybe they aren't familiar enough to answer that, but they can make an analogy to how it works in Hyper-V, or KVM, or Xen, or some other virtualization platform they have worked with and take a stab at an answer based on that experience. They may not be exactly right, but it shows that they are thinking in terms of concepts instead of a specific vendor language, which is really important for being able to pick up new skills. It's also a good chance to move the conversation into an area where they are more comfortable so you can get a feel for how they think. Knowing how to think about technology and make connections is way more important than knowing a specific command or procedure. Another thing I like to see is curiosity about the answer. If I ask a question and they don't know the answer, after they've taken their best shot at answering it anyway, I like when they ask me what the answer is. It shows that they are interested and engaged in learning and improving their job skills. And, again, it may be a jumping off point to a fruitful discussion that gives you more insight into how they think. For instance, I once asked a junior storage candidate how NetApp snapshots worked. He admitted that he didn't know, made a guess based on another technology (which was wrong), and then asked me how they actually work. I got about halfway through my response and his face lit up and he said "that sounds a lot like ZFS!" He didn't have ZFS on his resume because he had just worked with it at home, but he was exactly right (right enough Sun and NetApp to sue each other). That lead to a more general discussion of pros and cons of different flavors of storage snapshots, and allowed me to ask him questions about ZFS that would translate to working with NetApp.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Some of you sound really tightly wound and awful. And sometimes the work perks aren't an insidious trick to make you work longer hours or forget your lower pay, they are to help them compete in a very competitive job market. Being happy at work matters, even more than more money, so an employer who offers a job that doesn't make you hate your life in exchange for slightly less money isn't trying to screw you, they are just offering you other compensation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 08:28
|
|
|
There sure are a lot of people here who seem deeply traumatised by their lovely jobs and refuse to believe that well paying non-lovely jobs exist.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
the spyder posted:Do you work in downtown? Let me know if you want to grab a drink some time with Countofnowhere and myself if so. Sorry for the last response on this, but yea, I'm downtown for work a couple of days a week, usually on Tuesday and Thursday. Wouldn't mind doing a happy hour some time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:I know the pain all too well. They are pretty nice, they just aren't suited at all to Enterprise use.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Fiendish Dr. Wu posted:That sounds cool. You mean like floating down the river? Been wanting to do that. Tubing is awesome. Getting buzzed on light beer while you float down a crystal clear river in 90 degree heat is my favorite part of northwest summers. Highly recommended.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 17:10 |
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Last time I tried that I got stuck on a rock and spilled my beer That's why you bring more beer. A lot more beer.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2014 06:26
|
|
