This is incredibly interesting, and something I wouldn't have thought much of before becoming a parent.
Since our son was able to speak, he was able to vocalize when we were near a family member's house (I saw this weekly as we drove from the San Francisco Peninsula up into the city). I was always curious what triggered him to know "we're nearby". We passed several unique structures (overpasses, apartment buildings, signs) but I was incredibly curious which ones he associated with being nearby this particular relative.
Eventually when he was a little older, and we asked, he was able to say a specific color building "told him" he was close. Super interesting. Child development and understanding in itself is so amazing to watch.
Currently reading The Pixar Touch by David A. Price and they talk a lot about the types of software and standards for rendering they had to create over the years. Incredibly interesting looking back at what they were able to achieve. A talented crew for sure.
Thanks for the recommendation. I've always been interested in the rapid rise of Pixar and the consistency in quality they've maintained for these past two decades.
Every step of the way they were scheming how to get to feature films -- everything in between sounds like a means for resources (money, hardware, people, so on so forth).
If they can combine this ease of accessibility for developers with a security model on the end-user side, I think it can be a solid win.
I'd love to see granularity in what the API can access, for example, TripIt may request something like "Grant access to emails from the domain travelocity.com, usairways.com, etc.," and I can know with confidence that they will not have access to the rest of my inbox.
It doesn't have that level of granularity, just four auth scopes:
1) Full access to the account
2) Do everything but permanent deletes of threads and messages
3) Read everything, but no write access
4) Create/read/update/delete drafts and send messages/drafts, but no access to anything else
Finer-grained access (especially for reads, but there are some use cases for finer-grained sending controls, too) would be better, but this is, AFAIK, a step ahead of any other email API.
I immediately checked for that level of scope when they announced it, my post was merely a "this would be pretty amazing for security conscious end-users" not "this part of the API is cool" -- a wishlist item have you.
When I first started work out of college I kept a notebook of "things I like/don't like" about my managers, mostly as a training piece for myself. One of the top qualities one of my managers had was his comfort level with admitting to me "I don't know the answer to that, but I think I know where we can find it".
Probably summed up as something like "check your ego at the door".
This goes for not only managers, but any member of an organization -- pretending to know something when you really don't and being afraid to ask questions is a huge red flag to me for both managers and employees alike.
And back to the list, IMO that's a pretty good list, especially coming from one person's experiences.
Piecemeal advice, even if you know the answer to all job interview questions answering a straight up "no haven't dealt with that before but I'd tackle it by learning x y z." Will set you apart from pretty much everyone. Being able to confidently tell someone you politely have no fucking clue is pretty rare in my experience.
Example I interviewed for a job I know I was qualified for, they kept asking questions about things I really had no idea about (all stuff I had never dealt with before - only similar things) they were so refreshed by the honesty and how I dealt with not knowing things they offered me the job despite pretty much what I thought at the time was tanking the interview.
I used to interview people for Google, and "I don't know but here's how I would go about finding out" almost never counted against candidates. What would count against a candidate is if they made a wrong assumption and then blindly proceeded as if that assumption was correct.
I think that's happened before, not for one of my interviews but for one a friend gave. I don't think it counted against them, but they weren't good enough to meet the bar anyway. (That happens a lot - I've never had a non-intern candidate get through, and I've had friends go for 50 interviews without a single candidate getting hired.) We had a good laugh afterwards.
Similar experience.
I've had two job interviews where I answered a lot of the questions with, "I have no experience with that, how does it work?" or "Not sure, but sounds interesting". In one case they asked me to complete a technical challenge while watching over my shoulder using their tech stack just to see how I would try to solve their problems not a CS 101 exam question - which I would just google anyways). It was a great interview process. We discussed my approach during it, they helped me understand their method, we got to see what it would be like working together. In both job interviews I was offered the position, not based on my immediate IT skill tree, but character compatibility and demonstrated ability to learn.
This hit too close to home. As a subordinate and as a manager, I've always felt totally comfortable saying, "I'm not sure but I'll check this".
As a subordinate, it was quite annoying to deal with one of the worst managers in my career - I call him the "pretender". I already have plenty to do, and no I don't want to spend time on "checking if too many ping requests from other machines caused harddisk space on this machine to get full" (not joking, true story). The "pretender" had a title of "senior project manager" and the only thing true about that was the "senior" part (nothing against competent seniors), hemmed and hawed in the meetings pretending he knew what he was talking about and basically dumped it all on me.
Once I moved up and stopped reporting to him, he had nobody to dump work on, got exposed and last I heard, left.
Pretenders are my favorite type of manager to mess with. When they ask if ping requests filled up the disk I would gladly "check" that for them using the "system diagnostic regression suite" and ... nope ... everything looks good there ... But hmmmm ... Seems there was a power surge in the cloud layer ... You better inform upper management that there may a tornado forming in the cloud!!! If you can't argue with stupid at least have some fun with it.
One of the bigger takeaways from this article should be to make a decision of where to set layout parameters, and stick with it. I'm sure we all have opinions on using the in-code method vs IB, and can debate 'till the end of time. As a relatively new iOS dev picking up an existing codebase, the biggest thing I could say is be consistent. The number of times I tried setting something in code only to find it was being changed in IB is far too many.
Very good tip and something I find myself screwing up on projects all the time. A good example is with scroll views. There are quite a lot of parameters than usually need to be set (zoom scale, user interaction, multi touch, delegate). I can't count the number of times I've been debugging why it isn't working only to find I've mistakenly set a parameter in IB and code that are conflicting.
Short answer? Yes.
It has nothing to do with Codecademy though, it has to do with the fact that they were ambitious enough and had the drive to learn to code, and pursue it via some means (in this case, Codecademy). That speaks volumes.
Of course they'd be put through the same screening as anyone else applying for the role, so it's not like you're hiring someone that does not have the appropriate skillset for the job.
Frustrating...didn't think of this before posting, sorry to those of you who get the "Sorry..."
Maybe give TunnelBear a try? It's a free VPN service capped @ 500MB / month I think.
