c0da

I love your logo :D

  By calling for a theory to be more comprehensive, or for an explanation to
  include additional dimensions, or a concept to become more flexible and
  multifaceted, we paradoxically end up with less clarity. A further odd
  consequence is that the apparent scope of theories increases even
  as the range of their explanatory application narrows.

This seems analogous to poor imperative programming to me: as your code becomes more complicated, the range of it's application narrows.

  Location: Princeton, NJ
  Remote: No
  Willing to relocate: Yes, anywhere. (prefer Boulder, Portland, Seattle, or SF)
  Technologies: C/C++, Javascript, Java, Android, Python
  Resume: http://cricklet.github.io/files/kenrick-rilee-resume-2015.pdf
  Portfolio: http://cricklet.github.io/
  Email: kenrick dot rilee at gmail.com

I'm a senior at Princeton University. I was originally class of 2013, but took 2 years off to work on my own start-up, raising a small round of seed funding. After shutting down the company, I went to New York, where I worked for Codecademy and Venmo.

For someone finishing undergrad, I have a very diverse programming background. I spent 3 years focusing on Android, 2 years focusing on Javascript, and nearly all of my academic career focusing on C/C++ and graphics. I've also done plenty of full-stack work (notably at my start-up and at Codecademy).

I'm looking for a full-time software engineering job anywhere in the world.

I'm not seeing where they went back to it... It says:

"Mr. Ilagan, who is 59, said they watched the video 'very, very carefully' but decided to move on when the two weren't swayed. 'We didn't want to get bogged down,' said Mr. Ilagan, who works in marketing for a company that makes circuit boards."

Maybe I'm misreading it.

“Some of the most successful technology companies haven’t done much for job growth: “Take the ubiquitous iPod. It’s created less than 14,000 jobs in the U.S., Internet giant Google, 20,000 employees, Twitter, a mere 300””

It's absolutely absurd to imply that the extent of Google's effect on our economy is a sum of their employees. That quote completely mis-understands how markets work.

Google provides services that have completely revolutionized how people find information and build buisnesses. Of course that has impacted job growth.