The waiting times for some countries suck but there's a reason for that.
If the US didn't have a considerable amount of immigrants from those countries then the times would be 8x less.
Same happens with Mexico. There are so many Mexican immigrants in the US already (legal and illegal) that getting a GC it's almost impossible now unless you have a legitimate marriage to a citizen.
I remember the leaks mentioned something about reinforcing the "Trump = Hitler" idea.
This was all manufactured by the DNC and it didn't work. I wouldn't be surprised if they're currently planning ways to disrupt Trumps inauguration or other events during the next 4 years to see if he snaps and they can use that as ammo for the next election.
At the end of the day it's politics and playing dirty is expected but now that one side has been exposed it's hard to brush it off thinking everybody does it.
I agree that it is a normal (but nasty) part of politics to paint an unfavourable picture of an opponent (both candidates did that), but inciting violence is where it goes too far for me.
I imagine how many people in the US are now fearing for their lives because the DNC made them believe that Trump will probably build forced labour camps. And how many of them are not just frightened but even read to use violence.
When I check my Facebook newsfeed it's full of posts from friends who seem to be very afraid about what has happened.
If something terrible happens then it might be that the DNC has created the illusion which justified the violence.
Same experience as OP here both on number of applicants and number of qualified female applicants.
Take home test results were considerably worse for females too and they had over five days to complete a simple thirty minute exercise.
There might be responsibilities that get in the way but IMO if you can't find a slice of time to work on something that came up then I'll be really careful in considering you for a job.
Shit happens w/o planning and I'd rather have people I can count on.
30 minutes sounds less objectionable than what I've experienced.
The episode that turned me badly against take home tests involved a two-phase approach. Both were handled through a recruiter. The first was about a one hour set of questions (what does this code do, implement this class, explain dependency injection, that short of thing). That went well, so they then moved to a homework project they advised to spend no more than 5-7 hours on.
I did this, sent it back in and... crickets chirping. I called the recruiter (in house) every week or so to follow up. In about a month I got the standard "we've decided not to pursue your application further at this time.
I honestly have no idea if anyone even looked at it. I certainly never talked to a developer.
I can see how a 30 minute exercise could be a good thing, in that it could save everyone some time. Even then, though, I see it as a red flag if a company wants too much of my time before I talk to a developer in the recruiting process.
Keep in mind also, there's a huge difference between being available to work on something that comes up in a job, and shaking free 5-7 hours for a take home test that a company only might even bother looking at!
ISP network engineering/operational support software team here: People need to be able to find two hours of time (over a 5-6 day period) to complete a small take home project. When they do it and how they do it is up to them.
If somebody can't do this then they would not be a good fit to be in the on-call rotation where 1 out of every 5 or 6 weeks you could have alert emails and phone calls ringing on your phone at 3am. Sorry, but five to six nines statistical uptime over one year demand it.
It may be that the candidate doesn't want to waste time. There's a big difference between putting in some time on weekends and evenings for an important work issue that arises, vs doing some homework assignment that might not even get looked at.
I think this is one of the reasons Ms McDowell suggest doing the take home project later in the process, only once a candidate is promising, with a higher pass rate.
If you're using it simply to screen (i.e., if your pass rates are low), and the take home demands are substantial, you are likely wasting a huge amount of candidates time, in aggregate. This can legitimately harm a company's reputation among developers.
Everyone knew it wasn't a bomb? Really? AFAIK he was asked what it was and he was uncooperative although we won't ever know since his family refused the public release of the police records.
Anyways, if we're going with hearsay then we should mention the boy's sister was suspended for making a bomb threat so I'd doubt the average teacher would just brush this off as "definitely not a bomb".
Now, seems like in your mind it would've been better for the school to send a SWAT team after him. I'm sure that wouldn't be seen as a negative thing by anyone.
Better? No. More consistent with "we thought it was a bomb"? Yes. At which point, the discussion of what should be done when you think there's a bomb becomes germane. So far as I understand it, no one involved is claiming that they thought it was a bomb.
Far more conspicuous than relative lack of force (which, depending on particulars, might possibly have been a fine reaction to an actual bomb) is the apparent lack of any move to evacuate other students.
Same here. I've been a MySQL DBA for over 10 years and I've never had data loss or corruption even with power supplies dying and servers shutting down completely.
I've also used PG in quite a few projects and I can't say I find it better or faster at least for my usage. If anything it's more difficult to manage, there are way less decent tools to monitor, profiling is a PIA and those backslash commands just drive me nuts. I hate stuff like "\dt".
I don't see where it says it's already a feature. The note itself (not that post) says it might be available in the future but it's not there right now:
Messages and files shared in 1-1 chats are only browsable and searchable in HipChat by the two people involved.
"While admins do not have access to browse or search 1-1 chats through functionality within HipChat, this is an option we may provide in the future for organizations to opt-in to. If made available, it will not be retroactive, and we will be sure to address how affected users can be notified that their chats are subject to viewing by their admins"
http://help.hipchat.com/knowledgebase/articles/358098
It does say the organization can email them and ask for that so while technically possible it's not so easy for the admin to snoop.
