8 ms·

I got an impression who their target audience is, based on the examples used, drinking kombucha and listening to Spotify. All the young, beautiful people who w

I got an impression who their target audience is, based on the examples used, drinking kombucha and listening to Spotify. All the young, beautiful people who wouldn't have ever taken a computer science course if it weren't such a lucrative industry to be in right now. Maybe with this guide they can pass an interview at a big company where they just twiddle with bits all day. I won't be holding my breath until they can produce something useful.

gameguy43 9y ago
BRB, gonna change it to drinking "Ensure" and listening to "Days of Our Lives" :P
mdns33 9y ago
it is what it is.
FlyingSnake 9y ago
This is what you get when you commoditise Computer Science. The article is about coding interviews and then goes on to deliver a lecture about "Computer science in plain English". Isn't it common knowledge that Computer Science and coding are like chalk and cheese? People used to study DataStructures for a whole semester to get a deep understanding of how these work, and the time/space complexities affect system design. But now we get a pop-culture laced listicle that people will use to ace the interviews and write mediocre software. Does anyone wonder why there aren't listicles like this for Structural Engineering/Thermal Power Engineering/Mechanical Engineering etc? No wonder we get data-breaches, password leaks, system outages, because we continue to treat Computer Science/Software Engineering as the next fad to make quick buck, and not science. </rant>
- sgt101 9y ago
  It isn't science, or engineering, because many of the things that count in computing defy measurement : - code quality - software productivity - expected time between failure - tolerance to error - expected life in field - usefulness to users Because the science and engineering cultures of computing have failed to address these effectively, or even create cultural norms that support their development, a craft culture has evolved instead. Coders are artizans rather like clock makers in the 16th century.
  - sheldor 9y ago
    Nailed it. I have a very hard time explaining to my youngster colleagues that they're neither "engineers" nor "scientists'. Now I can use your words.
    - watwut 9y ago
      Job offerings look for "engineers" while they mean coders. Young person who think he/she does not count as engineer will pass over that job, despite being fully able to get it and work there. "You are not actually engineer" is bad advice in current job market. (I used to be that young person and used to pass on opportunities because of superficial reasons like that.)
      - sheldor 9y ago
        -
        watwut 9y ago
        Better for competition who gets the job with the same qualification and skills maybe, better for you personally (in both terms of what you learn and how good jobs you get) - no.
        sheldor 9y ago
        -
        watwut 9y ago
        Work life is as real as home life. And software work bubble is as real as any other bubble. What any of that has with values, I dont know.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    - 9y ago
watwut 9y ago
Are we now blaming young people for looking at employment perspective before picking up major? Or are we blaming them for trying to learn? Because last time students were mentioned, they were blamed for picking up unpractical major unlike everyone older in STEM who was supposed to make more rational choices (as supposedly proven by them not picking humanities by passion).
- FlyingSnake 9y ago
  No one is blaming the youngsters, people here are blaming the inadequate teaching methods.
  - watwut 9y ago
    This is not blaming of inadequate teaching methods: "All the young, beautiful people who wouldn't have ever taken a computer science course if it weren't such a lucrative industry to be in right now. Maybe with this guide they can pass an interview at a big company where they just twiddle with bits all day. I won't be holding my breath until they can produce something useful. "
  - pc86 9y ago
    Please quote the phrase(s) in daliwali's comment blaming inadequate teaching methods.
ubernostrum 9y ago
To be honest, your comment doesn't make you seem like you're someone who actually knows anything about or is particularly good at coding -- rather, it makes you seem like someone desperate not to have to compete with a larger field of candidates, and grasping for any reason you can find to claim they shouldn't be allowed to try for the same jobs as you. Also, I'm quite sure someone could easily come up with comments just as arrogant as yours, about you.
- kirRoyale 9y ago
  I didn't think their comment was arrogant. When I saw "Data Structures" for interviews, I didn't think it would be explaining binary to us.
  - ubernostrum 9y ago
    Usually, any "(X) for Interviews" post is a review of things that in theory a programmer learns very early on and then forgets due to disuse (since most programming interviews are essentially pop quizzes on such things). The ironic thing is that this biases toward the most newly-minted programmer; actual experienced working programmers rarely need to implement basic data structures or their relevant algorithms from scratch (they rely on existing implementations), and so move them to dusty disused corners of their minds, while newly-trained programmers with no job experience have been regurgitating these things on exams quite recently. So even the dismissiveness is wrong -- the original commenter is, to be honest, less likely to pass such an interview without remedial study, compared to the "young, beautiful people drinking kombucha and listening to Spotify" being sneered at, who probably have been taught more recently and have it fresher in their minds.
    - fundabulousrIII 9y ago
      It should be mandatory for programmers to be able to concoct even bad examples of a sort algorithm in real time and create data structures for anything from a linked list to binary trees. It is also important to have candidate code samples for an interview with dissection and analysis by the candidate. This is to understand where the programmer is in their professional development, how much is copy-paste and how much is functional and design integration. All this demonstrates level of knowledge and the candidates productive approaches. Having to teach programmers how to deal with recursion and other fundamental concepts or language specific approaches like pointer arithmetic or interpreted language nuances like lambda calculus and list comprehension should not be on the table.
nxsynonym 9y ago
Blame the young, beautiful people all you want for not slaving away over a 4 year degree that puts them in the same position as 1 year of self learning would get them, OR blame the business yuppies who keep coming up with the SaaS business models that don't need anything more than plug and play code monkeys. I understand memorizing data structures does not make a good engineer, but honestly who is still asking for cream of the crop engineers, especially at the entry/junior levels?
- CodeMage 9y ago
  At the risk of sounding like a cranky old codger, I'd like to point a couple of things out. If all you have are "plug and play code monkeys", all you'll have is shitty software. The fact that shitty software is "enough" for so many businesses is just another symptom of the biggest problem with our society: we optimize for profit and damn everything else.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - nxsynonym 9y ago
    Oh I agree completely. I just take issue with the fact that it somehow is a "youth problem", as is being pointed out by the parent comment. It's a business problem, not a lazy millennial/education problem. Stop hiring shitty coders and you'll stop getting shitty interviewees. Less shitty interviewees means less need for these types of "beat the coding interview" services/blogs. Honestly a lot of times the comments in these threads amount to "I was a geek and it wasn't cool, I know CS from the ground up, and nobody deserves to have an easy path to being a coder". It's an exhausted form of gatekeeping and doesn't make anything better for anyone.
    - CodeMage 9y ago
      I'm not defending such comments, but there's more to them than just gatekeeping. Speaking from my own point of view, the "I was a geek and it wasn't cool" sentiment comes from feeling betrayed by having your lifestyle become an industry that too often focuses on profit more than on quality; the "I know CS from the ground up" comes from frustration with all the people who dismiss learning from the ground up without understanding all the insights it gives you; and "nobody deserves to have an easy path to being a coder" is an exaggeration of "when you try to make learning easier than it can really be, you end up dumbing things down". Recently I found myself struggling to formulate my attitude towards software development and the best I could come up with is "lifestyle coding": sure, it's important to me to make something people will use and like, something that will improve life in some aspect, but in the end, I'm in this because I love to create programs. To me programming is more than my job, more than just means to an end, it's what I truly enjoy. People like me will often feel bitter about many aspects of our industry and it takes a conscious effort to keep aware of that feeling and to make sure it doesn't taint our decisions.
canes123456 9y ago
This is bull shit. Are you also the kind of guy (I know you are a guy) that is also on the "look out" for "fake" geek girls? The homepage looks a lot like the programmers I meet. Do they need to be overweight and not care about how they look to be real programmers that can actually produce something useful?
- daliwali 9y ago
  Is this a personal attack on me? :^) The projection in your comment is unreal: a just world fallacy where only unattractive people can be smart, attractive people are mindless, which was definitely not the point.
  - canes123456 9y ago
    How exactly is this projection? Your original comment was stereotyping real developers based on their appearance. They were not "legit developers" in your eyes because of how they looked. I am looking at the home page photos and it is not like they all look like models. They are younger and better looking than average but they would not look out of place on any dev team. This nonsense about what a developer looks like is pure bullshit. Why assume that a person is any less of a legit developer based on your image of how devs look? Why is more OK than any other kind of stereotyping? How is it better than stereotyping woman and driving?
    - daliwali 9y ago
      It was clearly not my intention to judge programming competency by appearance. But it is also undeniable that the industry does select for young, good looking people.
      - canes123456 9y ago
        It selects for young men. Looks do not help you much IMO. Being a woman hurts you.
cholantesh 9y ago
"Back in my day, no one cared about surviving in the overwhelmingly capitalist world economy."

gameguy43 9y ago

BRB, gonna change it to drinking "Ensure" and listening to "Days of Our Lives" :P

mdns33 9y ago

it is what it is.

FlyingSnake 9y ago

This is what you get when you commoditise Computer Science. The article is about coding interviews and then goes on to deliver a lecture about "Computer science in plain English". Isn't it common knowledge that Computer Science and coding are like chalk and cheese? People used to study DataStructures for a whole semester to get a deep understanding of how these work, and the time/space complexities affect system design. But now we get a pop-culture laced listicle that people will use to ace the interviews and write mediocre software. Does anyone wonder why there aren't listicles like this for Structural Engineering/Thermal Power Engineering/Mechanical Engineering etc? No wonder we get data-breaches, password leaks, system outages, because we continue to treat Computer Science/Software Engineering as the next fad to make quick buck, and not science. </rant>

sgt101 9y ago
It isn't science, or engineering, because many of the things that count in computing defy measurement : - code quality - software productivity - expected time between failure - tolerance to error - expected life in field - usefulness to users Because the science and engineering cultures of computing have failed to address these effectively, or even create cultural norms that support their development, a craft culture has evolved instead. Coders are artizans rather like clock makers in the 16th century.
- sheldor 9y ago
  Nailed it. I have a very hard time explaining to my youngster colleagues that they're neither "engineers" nor "scientists'. Now I can use your words.
  - watwut 9y ago
    Job offerings look for "engineers" while they mean coders. Young person who think he/she does not count as engineer will pass over that job, despite being fully able to get it and work there. "You are not actually engineer" is bad advice in current job market. (I used to be that young person and used to pass on opportunities because of superficial reasons like that.)
    - sheldor 9y ago
      -
      - watwut 9y ago
        Better for competition who gets the job with the same qualification and skills maybe, better for you personally (in both terms of what you learn and how good jobs you get) - no.
        sheldor 9y ago
        -
        watwut 9y ago
        Work life is as real as home life. And software work bubble is as real as any other bubble. What any of that has with values, I dont know.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - 9y ago

watwut 9y ago

Are we now blaming young people for looking at employment perspective before picking up major? Or are we blaming them for trying to learn? Because last time students were mentioned, they were blamed for picking up unpractical major unlike everyone older in STEM who was supposed to make more rational choices (as supposedly proven by them not picking humanities by passion).

FlyingSnake 9y ago
No one is blaming the youngsters, people here are blaming the inadequate teaching methods.
- watwut 9y ago
  This is not blaming of inadequate teaching methods: "All the young, beautiful people who wouldn't have ever taken a computer science course if it weren't such a lucrative industry to be in right now. Maybe with this guide they can pass an interview at a big company where they just twiddle with bits all day. I won't be holding my breath until they can produce something useful. "
- pc86 9y ago
  Please quote the phrase(s) in daliwali's comment blaming inadequate teaching methods.

ubernostrum 9y ago

To be honest, your comment doesn't make you seem like you're someone who actually knows anything about or is particularly good at coding -- rather, it makes you seem like someone desperate not to have to compete with a larger field of candidates, and grasping for any reason you can find to claim they shouldn't be allowed to try for the same jobs as you. Also, I'm quite sure someone could easily come up with comments just as arrogant as yours, about you.

kirRoyale 9y ago
I didn't think their comment was arrogant. When I saw "Data Structures" for interviews, I didn't think it would be explaining binary to us.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Usually, any "(X) for Interviews" post is a review of things that in theory a programmer learns very early on and then forgets due to disuse (since most programming interviews are essentially pop quizzes on such things). The ironic thing is that this biases toward the most newly-minted programmer; actual experienced working programmers rarely need to implement basic data structures or their relevant algorithms from scratch (they rely on existing implementations), and so move them to dusty disused corners of their minds, while newly-trained programmers with no job experience have been regurgitating these things on exams quite recently. So even the dismissiveness is wrong -- the original commenter is, to be honest, less likely to pass such an interview without remedial study, compared to the "young, beautiful people drinking kombucha and listening to Spotify" being sneered at, who probably have been taught more recently and have it fresher in their minds.
  - fundabulousrIII 9y ago
    It should be mandatory for programmers to be able to concoct even bad examples of a sort algorithm in real time and create data structures for anything from a linked list to binary trees. It is also important to have candidate code samples for an interview with dissection and analysis by the candidate. This is to understand where the programmer is in their professional development, how much is copy-paste and how much is functional and design integration. All this demonstrates level of knowledge and the candidates productive approaches. Having to teach programmers how to deal with recursion and other fundamental concepts or language specific approaches like pointer arithmetic or interpreted language nuances like lambda calculus and list comprehension should not be on the table.

nxsynonym 9y ago

Blame the young, beautiful people all you want for not slaving away over a 4 year degree that puts them in the same position as 1 year of self learning would get them, OR blame the business yuppies who keep coming up with the SaaS business models that don't need anything more than plug and play code monkeys. I understand memorizing data structures does not make a good engineer, but honestly who is still asking for cream of the crop engineers, especially at the entry/junior levels?

CodeMage 9y ago
At the risk of sounding like a cranky old codger, I'd like to point a couple of things out. If all you have are "plug and play code monkeys", all you'll have is shitty software. The fact that shitty software is "enough" for so many businesses is just another symptom of the biggest problem with our society: we optimize for profit and damn everything else.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- nxsynonym 9y ago
  Oh I agree completely. I just take issue with the fact that it somehow is a "youth problem", as is being pointed out by the parent comment. It's a business problem, not a lazy millennial/education problem. Stop hiring shitty coders and you'll stop getting shitty interviewees. Less shitty interviewees means less need for these types of "beat the coding interview" services/blogs. Honestly a lot of times the comments in these threads amount to "I was a geek and it wasn't cool, I know CS from the ground up, and nobody deserves to have an easy path to being a coder". It's an exhausted form of gatekeeping and doesn't make anything better for anyone.
  - CodeMage 9y ago
    I'm not defending such comments, but there's more to them than just gatekeeping. Speaking from my own point of view, the "I was a geek and it wasn't cool" sentiment comes from feeling betrayed by having your lifestyle become an industry that too often focuses on profit more than on quality; the "I know CS from the ground up" comes from frustration with all the people who dismiss learning from the ground up without understanding all the insights it gives you; and "nobody deserves to have an easy path to being a coder" is an exaggeration of "when you try to make learning easier than it can really be, you end up dumbing things down". Recently I found myself struggling to formulate my attitude towards software development and the best I could come up with is "lifestyle coding": sure, it's important to me to make something people will use and like, something that will improve life in some aspect, but in the end, I'm in this because I love to create programs. To me programming is more than my job, more than just means to an end, it's what I truly enjoy. People like me will often feel bitter about many aspects of our industry and it takes a conscious effort to keep aware of that feeling and to make sure it doesn't taint our decisions.

canes123456 9y ago

This is bull shit. Are you also the kind of guy (I know you are a guy) that is also on the "look out" for "fake" geek girls? The homepage looks a lot like the programmers I meet. Do they need to be overweight and not care about how they look to be real programmers that can actually produce something useful?

daliwali 9y ago
Is this a personal attack on me? :^) The projection in your comment is unreal: a just world fallacy where only unattractive people can be smart, attractive people are mindless, which was definitely not the point.
- canes123456 9y ago
  How exactly is this projection? Your original comment was stereotyping real developers based on their appearance. They were not "legit developers" in your eyes because of how they looked. I am looking at the home page photos and it is not like they all look like models. They are younger and better looking than average but they would not look out of place on any dev team. This nonsense about what a developer looks like is pure bullshit. Why assume that a person is any less of a legit developer based on your image of how devs look? Why is more OK than any other kind of stereotyping? How is it better than stereotyping woman and driving?
  - daliwali 9y ago
    It was clearly not my intention to judge programming competency by appearance. But it is also undeniable that the industry does select for young, good looking people.
    - canes123456 9y ago
      It selects for young men. Looks do not help you much IMO. Being a woman hurts you.

cholantesh 9y ago

"Back in my day, no one cared about surviving in the overwhelmingly capitalist world economy."