mzarate06

There are primarily two form factors to consider ...

The 2.5" sata ssds offer nice price per GB. SanDisk and Crucial are two brands I've used that weren't as expensive as their Samsung counterpart, but still provided reliable value and performance. They have 500 GB - 1 TB drives on Amazon right now in the $70-$140 range, new. There's also the Samsung Evo in this form factor, but a little more.

NVME drives (M.2) offer better performance, but for bulk storage, that may not be so relevant. There are lower cost nvme drives in the $70-$80 range for 500 GB. I've only used Samsung NVME drives though, which tend to cost more, but they've never caused issues in my systems.

Going off closing lows, the SPY is up ~25% from it's ~223 close on 23 March. The Nasdaq Composite is up ~19%. That puts them back at mid-late 2019 prices, not 2016-2017 levels.

This all agrees w/your latter point - investors are already bullish again - but I wanted to add data points to supplement the market has recovered much faster than some people realize.

Are you willing to share a little about what made the difficult courses difficult? Heavy math component? Hard algorithms? Time consuming programming? I'm considering this program (and UT's), any additional information would be much appreciated.

Congrats on completing your last semester btw; no doubt a significant commitment and accomplishment.

For example, that permits collaborative code questions or white boarding, but not take home code challenges. Past experience has shown me those are always horribly estimated, and require more time on the candidate's part than issuers claim. Put yourself in the candidate's shoes, having 3-5 of these things to work through (unpaid, no doubt, as OP rightfully objects to). Not fun!

I've found that rule a simple, transparent, way of showing respect for candidates' time. Which I've always found admirable, from both sides of the hiring table.

That statement relates to a feeling I have about burnout - I don't believe you fully recover from it. At least in my experience, while I (and others I've discussed this with) recovered by some point, I also felt something was left permanently weakened, in a way that made me increasingly susceptible to later bouts I'd experience.

There are probably normal factors that contribute to that, such as how much we age between bouts. However, after each bout, I recall not feeling the same after recovering as I did prior to when the bout started.

What term do you think they'd use, and why?

To supplement, see my 2015 comment in response to Lovefield: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10197672

I'm sure there's been updates since then, just linking for reference.

Here's what he did say (his full post is here [1], if anyone's curious), which I think indicate culture, area, and distance from where he considers home as the factors affecting his health:

But what I've realized is that the last few years of living in such a singular environment have taken a huge toll on my life and started affecting my health. My friends, what I consider to be my home, and my life are back in Silicon Valley, which is also much closer to my family. Seeing how much I've left behind these past few years, it is clear to me that the time has come to return.

Specifics or misquotes aside, if you meant that the offer from Facebook was his primary reason for leaving, I can see that too, so won't disagree with the notion.

[1] https://www.facebook.com/hbarra76/posts/10154010035641612

Some aspects are different, but reminds me of a similar tactic Network Solutions pulled back in 2008 wrt to listening to domain name searches then raising their price: https://techcrunch.com/2008/01/10/network-solutions-using-qu...

Although in regard to the post title (which has since been changed) indicating Snowden was the Lavabit investigation target, here's original discussion from March: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11308160

Code escrow is in fact what we're looking at. I guess part of my question intended to hear more about how outlining and negotiating that process went. E.g. I'm curious what objections or sticking points may have been encountered, from either side, when approaching the agreement to make a copy of the product accessible to the customer (in certain circumstances).

Hopefully it's straight forward and non-interesting, in which case I'd have no further questions.

Can you elaborate on the details or circumstances these parts outlined? Particularly in regard to provisions or protocols to be followed in the event you become unable to render product service (due to disaster against the product or its infrastructure, personal circumstances, or otherwise).

I'm in a similar position that you've described. I'm mostly a one-man shop with a SAAS product that has a Fortune 100 customer. As it becomes increasingly integrated within their company they've voiced concern over what happens if I become unable to render service. We likely have contract amendments coming for code escrow, but I've no experience in this particular area, so thought I'd ask what you learned from these parts of your contract.

If it matters, the product is tightly customized to the customer's work flow, and provides a solution they've been unable to readily find elsewhere. So in the event that service can no longer be rendered, having them subscribe to another product wouldn't be immediately viable.

From here, what's stopping the FBI from claiming they found X, Y, and Z on the phone, and further claiming they were all important pieces of evidence, that could possibly have prevented the attack, etc., etc., when they really didn't? Then, use that to bolster their arguments against encryption and privacy?

What means will keep them honest about what they did or did not find?

It's not about creating vs. removing "stuff". It's about value and advancing business objectives.

That's to say that your citation doesn't carry weak perception b/c it mentions removing stuff, but rather b/c it fails to mention the value that created. A better way of wording it might be something like:

"improved [site performance, or dev efficiency, or something else] by XYZ% by removing low-use features, without sacrificing revenue or customer satisfaction."

... b/c simply removing features (regardless of LOC) used by 10% of a user base, in and of itself, doesn't offer any justification or value. I'm not saying it can't, just that I'd be concerned if that happened without strong rationale and a measurable net positive.

And the same goes for adding or building stuff. E.g. If you wrote a project management system at your previous job, focus on citing the number of hours or projects it tracked, or how it reduced the number of meetings required. The fact that you "built" it isn't as interesting as the value it created for the team/company.

So if positive perception is what you're after, focus on presenting measured value. Then, whether it was created by adding or removing is a non-issue.

Can you name a few such annoyances and how Laravel addressed them?

And do you mean to say that Laravel addresses them, while other frameworks don't?

> "With WebSQL being deprecated, and IndexedDB not providing structured queries, web developers need a tool to satisfy their structured query needs."

> "Web app developers need structured queries to work in the mobile world."

> "With IndexedDB ... there's a steeeep learning curve to make it useful for your app. Moreover, IndexedDB does not provide structured queries."

> "IndexedDB does not offer structured query features, such as sorting by multiple columns, or joining the results of multiple tables."

As someone that looked forward to WebSQL, this is painful to hear. Many of us realized the above from the beginning. Yet, some in the standards committee found a way to shoot down WebSQL, w/vague rationale such as "we don't feel it's the best path for the web".

Well, thank you. Instead of giving us one of the most well tested SQL implementations (SQL Lite) that addresses all of the above, and much more, we were shoved a harder to use, more verbose, and less powerful alternative (IndexedDB). And as a result, we're having to implement our own relational databases. In JavaScript. 4-5 years later.

No offense to Lovefield, but it represents everything wrong w/the decision to deprecate WebSQL and implement IndexedDB instead. It was also the single-most decision that made me lose faith in the standards committee.

2) JavaScript, because if learning one language, such as C, is important, so is learning a language on the other end of the spectrum. And in some important ways JavaScript stands opposite C. Learning both forces the programmer to understand managed vs. unmanaged, working with and without a compiler, strict vs. dynamic typing, deploying a binary vs. a web app, etc. Those are all opposites programmers should gain experience with at some point.

Plus, JavaScript's ecosystem is just too rich too ignore.

3) SQL, b/c working with databases and relational data has always been important, and that won't change.

Often times they don't. My experience has been that wishful thinking prolongs agony. The sooner you get out, the sooner you find better opportunities.

I agree it'd be nice to be able to change things for the better, I've just never seen that pulled off. E.g. try working in the gaming industry. I can't tell you how many devs wanted to change the culture of game development, only to find themselves burned out months later, wishing they had gotten out sooner.

Also consider negative culture or dislike for your superiors. If founders or your superiors are older than you or have much more experience than you do, and they often will, realize the things you dislike about them may be in their, or the company's, DNA. I mean that figuratively, and literally. Once culture or habits have been set, they're very hard to change.

They've been incredibly helpful, and a lot of fun. Books and blog posts help, but nothing beats having a passionate teacher sit next to you and coach you along.

Here are some recommendations and details on how these go down, if you're interested:

1) Read 1-2 books on design beforehand (I recommend these [1]), perhaps introductory in nature. There are several principles and beginner concepts that you can become familiar with on your own that'll provide a better foundation once you've hired a design tutor or coach.

2) Have a tangible goal to facilitate your learning. Like any art, everything design related takes time, and having something interesting to retain your focus over days, if not weeks, if not months, will keep it fun and meaningful. My tangible goal has been redesigning one of my company's products.

3) Before each session I send my designer a page or two I want to focus on (e.g. client list and client edit pages), goals and sample content, and examples of designs I like for inspiration. We both work on designing those pages independently. We don't share or view each other's work until we're in session.

4) Once we're in session we review our designs and discuss each of our decisions on spacing, content choice, emphasizing this or that via different font styling, coloring, etc. As expected, my designer's work is always superior, but the real eye openers are when he walks me through why that is, especially when he points out how much easier, faster, but more relaxed my eye gets to what it wants on a given page w/his designs vs. mine.

We've had 6 sessions so far and I'm convinced this is the best method of learning design (just as having a private tutor is superior for many other things). If you have someone you can hire for a similar arrangement, at least consider doing so, I highly recommend it.

[1][a] Designing Web Applications (Nathan Barry)

[1][b] The Non-Designer's Design Book (Robin Williams)

[1][c] Don't Make Me Thing (Steve Krug)

Then move your SCM server wherever "internally" is? SCM does not require "the cloud".

Regarding ant not being simple to install ... would you mind elaborating? I've installed ant a handful of times, either via "sudo apt-get install ant" or as a plugin to my editor; both ways were simple IMO.

And I agree with simplicity, particularly with dependencies. I mentioned ant off the cuff, though I also use shell scripts when I can. They handle most remote tasks I can do in ant, but w/a smaller foot print.

However, I don't agree with some of the author's examples.

Git has proven to be rather simple, minus the initial 1 week learning curve (of casual use, give or take). I use it in solo private projects and in teams. Branching and merging, in particular, are part of why I love it so much; much better than the CVS and SVN days.

And isn't using SCM considered a best practice? I think so, but I'd be interested in hearing any counters.

I also find build tools essential. Even for web apps, simple ant scripts that automate remote tasks have proven invaluable, especially wrt deployments.

Respectfully, I don't care about an abstract graph, nor about having to remember point ranges for its various states. I care about the actual points, and seeing their numerical value is faster and easier to comprehend.

To add to what you've said, 9 times out of 10 I'll actually click to scan the comments first, not the article. Comments often provide some summary that indicate whether an article is worth reading or not.

But Dell does advertise panel types, especially for their Ultra Sharp monitors (which the 2007wfp is one of). E.g. click into any Ultra Sharp monitor here [2], then view the Tech Specs tab and look for panel type.

> After all, not every one cares what type of panel is used

Agreed, although I'd argue those are likely people that don't seek out higher priced monitors with picture quality only IPS can deliver. It's worth making clear that the difference between IPS and any other panel type is noticeable, in both display quality and (especially) price. In a lot of cases I know of someone owning an IPS monitor, it was an intentional purchase having at least something to do with that detail.

[1] http://www.dfsdirectsales.com/StoreCatalog/ctl641/cp57138/si...

[2] http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/category.aspx?c=us&catego...

For one, I only purchase IPS monitors. Even before I found out about everything, I had already noticed slightly less picture quality compared to other IPS monitors I used; lesser viewing angle, colors shifting, etc. Part of what caught my attention regarding the customer complaints I found is their symptoms were apparent on the 2 I purchased. So despite not knowing I had a PVA panel, there was a noticeable quality difference that mattered. The customer complaints supplemented, rather than created, my initial concerns.

Second, I was cheated. The monitor they delivered was inferior to the one advertised (at the time, the 2007wfp was advertised with an IPS panel, a detail later removed). That's lying. What's worse, is a customer support department trying to sweep it under the rug.