hkh

Yea! Very true. and exactly as you say, CI/CD is going that way as well and we fit in there, so it would make sense for our pricing to fit that.

Good point. I wonder as the world goes more towards serveless, if users will slowly become used to per call (or maybe per comment, or as you say per re-run) pricing

Yea, we will have to strike a balance so we don't contribute to the cost complexity too! haha

We talked about if we should approach it with user-based pricing, or usage-based pricing. Do you think usage based pricing would be preferred here? Or should we keep it in a way that users can run it as many times as they like?

Our current thinking is buyer-based open core with per user pricing, maybe like SYNK.

I can't tell you how many times we've had to rebuild this feature in the past! Super cool!

It weirdly is!

I think so yes, and if you are building something cool, then you can use Show HN so it goes under the 'show' category.

Hey! Thanks :) We are planning on adding other IaC tools too! I've made an issue for CF, which others would you prioritize? Cheers!

I loved the talk by Kat on this topic: https://www.ycombinator.com/library/6i-how-to-launch-again-a...

Hope you find it useful :) Cheers

Great point! I wonder if there are things we can do to break the scenario while the user is logged in to simulate operational issues such as OOMKilled, network glitches or disk filled. That might enable a better root cause discussion during interviews

Hi HN, Hassan here - one of the co-founders of CircuitOps. While building CircuitOps, we have had so much fun watching people try to diagnose and fix issues in production like environments, so we made it into a public challenge!

We are planning on releasing one challenge a week.

Would love to hear your feedback and see some of you on the leaderboard!

Cheers, Hassan

I think it'll take a little while for that to trickle through. The main issue I'm seeing when talking to companies about this is that they don't have any process in place for remote work of new hires, so we are talking about interviewing to training to ongoing 'how to fit into the workplace' and meet their colleagues etc. But I think once companies try out a few ways to do this, it'll become more normal.

Hey Anil, ah this is awesome! Quick question - why was this part of hackerrank in the higher payment section? have you found that only bigger companies would use this tool, or was this more of a pricing decision to have features unlocked when customers pay more? What's been your experience of running this? Would love to hear your thoughts on this space, good and bad! Cheers!

hey! thats awesome feedback! Thanks for taking the time and writing it out for us.

A few followups: 1. Thats an interesting idea - for the hiring manager to write a test script according to what they want to check. We are thinking more about auto-marking, but there are some basics we could do such as time it took, how long between each command, what 'types' of command were used a lot (is a person circling back and forth between folders, or are they going somewhere) etc, and the obvious 'did they fix it'. Question - what do you think if we let people actually write a terraform script to launch their own scenarios as they want?

2. Current working idea is either $ per test, or groups of interviews. So <100 interviews is a flat $x a month. Does this make sense to you or would you prefer it a different way?

3. Ready to go! It has actually been used in real life hiring by a company already.

4. haha great minds ... just got to this question after I wrote my respond to #1.

5, 6, 7. Yep and Great idea!

8. We are using Pulumi to launch the scenarios, which are running on VMs. SSH connections are made through a jump box which is recording the sessions.

Thank you so much for the feedback, greatly appreciated! Cheers, Hassan

Hey! That's a great idea too - testing the candidate in a team / pair with your own team will really help the discussion of thought as well, vs just knowing the commands to run and troubleshoot the system.

hey! We currently don't auto-mark and you are spot on, the hiring manager can see exactly what the candidate ran and judge for themself (e.g. some scenarios you can just re-start the machine, but that doesn't solve the root cause). But I think we will need to create a report on how well the candidate did. Based on what we've seen, it seems better to award lots of little points vs a few big points for the "right answer". What would you expect/want to see in a results report? Cheers, Hassan

Or maybe even Kubernetes?

So you wouldn't use a Heroku or cloudfoundry etc? You'd go for IaaS. Why?

I did the comparison with AWS On-Demand and RIs, and I have to admit, very impressive! Here is the blog: http://www.rightscale.com/blog/cloud-cost-analysis/google-sl...

Why not just use Google Analytics Experiments? That way you can also gather a st ton of other data to help you see if either A or B is performing better.

nice!

We had gone through our business case and it was solid. We based our numbers on what we had achieved in the first two months of launch (with 0 marketing budget). We had been approached and offered investment as well as a global IT company asking for an exclusivity deal.

However, I think the numbers that the Valley works on is on a different scale and that's what we are trying to convey in the blog post (not bulshitting without basis).

One of the Rackspace employees said the same thing [http://lnkd.in/m3cQhJ], but I disagree with the support argument. Even if you include AWS's Platinum support (guaranteed 15min response, see http://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/) it's an extra 10% of the monthly AWS bill so around $7K for 3 years in the example that was mentioned in the blog - which is still a lot cheaper than total Rackspace costs. I think it comes down to Rackspace not having reserved instances, which is why AWS is much cheaper (not support).