With LLMs? I don't think something like leftPad was every difficult to create.
432 karma · joined September 18, 2013
You would probably say that it isn't EASY because in the US it is much easier to do. You might not be able to do it immediately without notice period unless the employee does something really stupid or illegal.
You can however fire someone any time when you give them the notice period defined in the employment contract. You might need to give them a warning that they are underperforming first so that they can fix it before you fire them, but after that, you can just fire them.
This happens ALL THE TIME, but it isn't done as a mass/group action. If you have a problem with an individual then the individual gets fired.
Also, in the first 6 months, you don't need any reason and the notice period is shortened to 2 weeks.
Picture was a requirement, but that is slowly becoming less popular. Especially in Tech. Leave it off if you don't feel like including a Picture. I stopped including a Picture as well some years ago and it has not harmed (or improved) me yet.
Which other personal information is required? I would expect contact information and Name. Of course also your Work History and Education. Which personal information do you have a problem with?
> the requirement of a reference letter from your previous employer,
Yes, they are required to give you a reference letter when you leave the company. Honestly, I have never been asked to provide said letter to my new employer in the 15 Years I have worked in Germany.
Most times I don't even have one during the hiring process since I am still working there. So, even if asked about a reference letter, I would just reply that I do not have one. Which, again, has not happened to me yet.
No, that is not the case. You can still fire people and you can do so especially if they are underperforming. You just can't do it as a mass layoff.
If you fire someone then you need a reason to do so. If you fire people because of a layoff then you need to show that the layoff is legitimate.
You can not just group underperformers and let them go as a layoff because you are circumventing labor law. You can not lie about the reason why you are letting someone go.
No one would care if you fired 99% of your company IF you are prepared to show they were underperforming and that was the official reason given.
Like, I could just stop showing up and they would fire me for cause without notice, but that matters only if I needed unemployment pay. If I already had a new job that I would like to start immediately, I could just do that.
In my experience, yes. The default is German without subtitles. I have seen the OV and OmU abbreviations a lot of times, but most showtimes don't have anything listed which will mean German.
By that, I mean three different Okta logins, and logging in to any of them will log you out of the other two. If I want to do anything, it means I need to log in again because it is unlikely that I am logged in to the right account.
Yes, I need all 3 multiple times daily. There is no logic about which one I need for which system.
IT knows this is not how it is supposed to be, but they assure us that this is a temporary situation. I guess 1.5 Years is still temporary.
What I wanted to get across is that Jira makes it very easy to give control to the Team that is using a specific Board or Workflow. If your company don't trust their Teams with that then that is a failure of the company and not a failure of Jira.
Sounds to me like you probably never edited the Jira workflows yourself. If it takes your company more then an hour to change a workflow then that is a decision to artificially limit things.
Also: Custom workflows start with with the "Any" transition on all states and when adding a new status it also has the "Any" transition. If that is different in your workflows then that is a deliberate decision.
We set up our Board and Workflow fairly minimal. Which is probably why I don't have any problems with Jira.
> And "transitions are impossible by default and only possible if enabled by the admin" is a uniquely bad Jira-ism that other tools in this space don't have
What do you mean by that? The default Workflow in Jira is that all Issues can transition into any status.
Which is absolutely not the fault of Jira. Jira does not make you create 20 boards and per default a Title is all you need to create a Ticket. By the complaints own wording they had 2000 tickets because management refused to delete outdated and irrelevant tickets.
A new tool would not fix this since I would bet that management would insist that all 20 boards with all tickets in the backlog would need to be transitioned to the new tool. The mandatory fields are obviously also highly important to management, those need to be configured in the new tool as well.
Instead of complaining about the obviously bad management they just complain about Jira. That is, I think, very common when complaining about jira.
For context: I worked with C, C#, some Python and now mostly work in Go.
Is that actually true? You start at a 1500 in lichess, but that is a provisional rating and the outcome of your first few games are going to cause BIG swings in your rating. After your rating is no longer a provisional rating then that is going to slow down.
Losing a few games at the start might take a lot more wins to "even out" in rating. Just keeping an even record might not be enough to stay 1500.
Company Leadership asks for estimate with barely any information, I will then say that I need to learn more about the project and look into the codebase, leadership then says that they "just" need to have an estimate to approve this work and if they want to do this project at all. Around and around it goes until I give them a large estimate (which is large because of all the unknowns including the unknown scope) which is then too much and too expensive for leadership.
Writing a Personal Essay after, what sounds like, an automated email is not something I would consider as a good interview process.
Wait, does that mean that dishwashing pods are not Vegan?
all(m=="white" for m in marbles)
"For all x, if x is a marble and x is in the bag, then x is white"
I would question if nothingness is a marble. Or would you say that the following statement is also true? I would say that x is a marble and therefore can be neither even or odd because it is not a number?
"For all x, if x is a marble and x is in the bag, then x is even"
That is just a nonsense question same as asking if all the non-existing marbles are of a particular color.
The comment he replied to was claiming that any question that is true for n = 1 should also be true for n = 0, but this comment shows that it is obvious nonsense.
The comment above basically claimed:
marbles = ["black"]
all(m=="black" for m in marbles) # => True
marbles.pop()
all(m=="black" for m in marbles) # => True
all(m=="white" for m in marbles) # => True
all(m=="green" for m in marbles) # => True
Just because the question “there is a marble in the bag such that…” is false does not mean you can just negate it and say “all marbles in the bag are…” if the actual answer is that the question is not applicable.
Coffee shops are, in my experience, quite a bit quieter then open offices and less distracting too.
I would honestly prefer going to a coffee shop to work then a "open office", but also I am really thankful that I don't have to do either.
WHY?
I should be able to load anything on any phone THAT I OWN. Even if the manufacturer does not want me to. I bought the Phone. I didn't Rent it. I didn't borrow it. IT IS MY PHONE. Why should the manufacturer dictate what I am allowed to do with the phone?
"My Liberty ends where yours starts." is a great Quote in your bio. Is it just there as decoration or do you believe what it means?
Actually I don't have to outlaw things I don't like for myself. I will simply not go skydiving and other people are wellcome to take the risk for themselves.
No one is forcing you to load anything you don't want to. You don't need to force your decision onto everyone. There is a difference between "I don't want to load your code" and "I don't want anyone to have the ability to load your code".
As far as I am concerned AI responses will never be reliable without verification. Same as any human responses, but there you can at least verify credentials.
We align the Take home assignment very close with what the position actually entails. If you struggle with this assignment you would not succeed with actual tasks we do daily.
> Obviously there needs to be some judgement of skill. But take home projects where you're judged essentially against how much time you put into them
As I said elsewhere as well: People are free to choose to do a Technical Interview instead. If you fear that you would need 2 whole days you could take the 1 hour interview instead.
> if you spend more time it's going to look good, because the best projects are from people that spend a lot of time on them...
That is not my experience. There are people that just can't make it look good.
> It's not expensive to hire and fire someone. Not that expensive.
It absolutely is. Maybe not where you are, but where we are it is expensive. For one there is a big amount of paperwork involved, contracts, NDA's and background checks. We can't do this unless we know we actually really want to hire you.
I also can't expect a new employee to be productive right away. There is going to be a onboarding period of at least 3 months during which the employee probably needs a little bit more mentoring of a (more) senior engineer. If we would just hire 20 people for every position that we need to fill we would not do anything else then just onboard new people. So, YES, it is significantly more then 20h of 100 candidates time. Not to mention that the take home we give out takes maybe at a maximum 4h (if the candidate is fairly junior and has to look up stuff constantly, many people just do it in 1h).
Also: I think it would be HIGHLY unfair for the people to just hire 20 candidates if you only plan to keep 1. They probably quit their jobs or said no to other opportunities. We only hire people we see a long term future at the company.
> I'd like to ask you, how many candidates a year do you have turning in take home projects?
It is fairly late in our hiring process and it takes a significant amount of time from at least 2 senior engineers each time to review. I don't have the exact numbers how many times per Year, but we try to keep it very low and only if there is an actual interest on our side.
Needless to say we didn't proceed with signing the contract.
2 - We can not trust the CV. Maybe the company did a test, maybe they didn’t. Maybe their test are to our standard, maybe they aren’t. Maybe the candidate barely passed. Maybe the candidate actually failed but made up in other ways that might be relevant to the other company, but not ours. I doubt anyone would give us this information about their current or former employees. Maybe the candidate really did work on the projects he claimed or maybe he was only tangentially involved. That is a lot of unknowns. A test clears up what the person actually can do.
3- Yes. It works for us. Do we miss out on some good candidates because of this? Yes, but it definitely prevented us from hiring bad candidates.
Again: if there is a better way then I would like to know. I have not found one yet.