matz1

65 ms·

871.
by matz1 7y ago
I didn't say families are not important, to some people they are important but you can't use that as an excuse.
872.
by matz1 7y ago
bad metrics ? maybe according to you but I doubt it according to the person who do the hiring. The people who do the hiring get to the decide what the metrics is and what they considered good/qualified.
873.
by matz1 7y ago
> this is discriminatory against people with families and and commitments that prevent them from spending hundreds of hours in prep Maybe but its not the purpose to select people with families or commitment. You choose to have families o
874.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes, which is not impossible to tackle. There is structured and systematic way to attack it. Tons of study guide and materials on the net to help you. Not to mention tons of people successfully get hired.
875.
by matz1 7y ago
Right, which misses the point of having this interview style in the first place.
876.
by matz1 7y ago
Doesn't leetcode pretty much cover most of the question?
877.
by matz1 7y ago
I think you missed the point of this interview style. This style of interview is scalable, predictable, efficient and effective. It is useful in that way.
878.
by matz1 7y ago
Because she think its important, she can write however she want.
879.
by matz1 7y ago
>Honestly having an interview process that is highly standardized and teachable + learnable is a good thing Yes I agree but the current way we have is not even close to that. He touch that issue in the article. So you spend a lot of time
880.
by matz1 7y ago
Merely stating that she is a black woman from the Bronx means she has been treated differently ?
881.
by matz1 7y ago
> I don't care that it is insecure, as long as it is secure Ok let me clarify, I don't care if they use plain text pwd as long as it secure. >The point being that "stored in plain text, as long as it is secure" is
882.
by matz1 7y ago
I did read your whole post. Can you elaborate?
883.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes, at the end of the day, as long as the money is there when i need it, I don't really care how you store it.
884.
by matz1 7y ago
The risk are highly exaggerated, the damage may never occurs in the first place. It may seem unlikely that the bank can keep my money save by using plain text pwd but if they can somehow do that, why do I care. Even in the unlikely event th
885.
by matz1 7y ago
Heres another analogy, I've been using a black box sorting function from third party library, its super fast and satisfied all my requirements. Then they told me they implemented it using <insert super scetchy/controversial met
886.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes I don't care how they do it as long as they can protect my money. Likewise, they may use top of the line, super secure lock but if they can't protect my money, I wouldn't use them.
887.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes, if they cause the customer actual damage, such as increased fees then it is a concern. But if there is no actual damage then what's the issue?
888.
by matz1 7y ago
Sure, If the doctor can deliver baby safely and not causing any other damage despite not washing hands then what's the issue? That's why I asked what is the actual damage. Is the money is stolen ? Is the money can't be access
889.
by matz1 7y ago
>Might be real disruptive if you’re in the middle of buying a house. Agree, I consider this a damage but if the bank can avoid causing me any disturbance despite of using clear text password or <insert any other questionable security
890.
by matz1 7y ago
Maybe but that is their problem. Its still the bank responsibility to deal with that.
891.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes, I expect the bank to protect my money. What I'm saying is how they actually do it, clear text pwd or whatever is not really my concern. Why should I ?
892.
by matz1 7y ago
Is there actual damage? At the end of day, as a customer，all I care is my money is available (not stolen) and I can access it when I need it. Why should I care about implementation details ?
893.
by matz1 7y ago
Not everyone is agree with that. If everyone did that we wouldn't need police.
894.
by matz1 7y ago
>Is there anything you consider going too far at all Yes, when the risk/cost outweigh the benefit. >Murdering people to harvest organs? Same thing, if benefit outweigh the cost then yes it will be done. Thats why murder is illega
895.
by matz1 7y ago
>Would you be unhappy if someone stole money from your bank account? If I'm the one being stolen, of course but not if I'm the one who stole (again provided I will not be in trouble). Provided they won't get in trouble, ho
896.
by matz1 7y ago
I would not but I would not surprise if some people do. Thats why there is severe punishment for grinding baby.
897.
by matz1 7y ago
Fair enough, I would do it as long as I can still find employee, in other words as long as I can get away with it. Likewise, for Apple if their action is not costly enough, they will continue doing it.
898.
by matz1 7y ago
Yes its simply cost/benefit analysis.
899.
by matz1 7y ago
>Alternatively, you could treat people like people and give them an actual measure of respect instead of stealing time and money from them Thats depends on what one value, if you think treat people like people is important then yes you s
900.
by matz1 7y ago
> You would steal from your employees too? if the benefit > risk/cost then absolutely.

More ›