rambossa

How is dev ex with Reason? Intellisense?

Implications of this?

Thank you. Many want their cake and to eat it too.

I credit any of my "success" to the struggles I had as a child. Our world isn't perfect, and some of us experience different & harsher aspects of its flaws. I think the earlier some experience these flaws, the more they learn to adapt and realize truths of human nature. We learn that many things aren't going to be handed to us and to get what we want we will have to work a bit harder, or struggle a bit more (In the military we called this "Embrace the Suck").

We learn that our families aren't the same we see on our favorite TV shows. It hurts & its sad for young children to experience a struggle, but I think they can ultimately strengthen them -- unless the difficulties are so severe, or misguiding, that they lead children down the wrong path of life (i.e. severe psychology disorders, crime).

Again though, the world/nature is a tough place, and its nice to want to enforce being easier on and conceal realities from children, but I think there is something of value in experiencing "realness"/struggle -- a simple & less-harsh example is the losing team getting no trophy.

fair enough

> Ever tried to security update a container?

Wouldnt the approach for security updates be to replace the container?

felt like I could get better light & debate on my opinions in this thread. Wasnt sure about HN etiquette.

I hate the Cracking the Coding Interview/Leetcode style... studying for these type of interviews is annoying. Trying to find a good video on youtube, where they aren't just naively coding up the bruteForce->optimal possible solutions, especially is irritating. It is literally a landscape of college kids with thousands of viewers who treat these interviews like a standardized test (SAT, GMAT). Even the author of the book produces videos with very little insight or meaningful content.

"Find all the subsets in a set that add up to sum" -- "Okay for this we will use the sliding window technique and here is how it is done" -- WTF is this. I get that they want to see problem-solving skills, but this is on a different level requiring the interviewee to have studied and knowledge of the technique, otherwise we are basically trying to develop efficient algorithms from scratch and in little time. --This makes sense for college interviewees who have only studied the past 4 years, but for a professional with experience, why is this adequate??

Does algorithmic programming matter?-- still yes. But the way it is interviewed is absurd and inadequate. I had a production service centered around the stable-roommate-problem. It took me a week or two (mostly research) to develop something out and fit it into our codebase. It then took 1-3 more weeks to actually make it work for us and cover edge cases (i.e. Irving's algo quits after instability -- this isnt an option in the real-world). I read much material on the subject, other's code, had many deep-thinking sessions where I was mostly in my head, wrote unreadable scratch on paper, collab-whiteboarded (sometimes arguing), tested&failed PoCs, and had many breaks in-between it all. How successful was that project?--very, did I need to know and study techniques with lacking/meaningless basis to do it--no.

"Self-driving cars are here" - Not criticizing, but I thought they were already "here"?

This is just a new industry competitor, correct? or am I missing something?