1. Have kids.
2. Have them at school by 7:30am every morning for a decade.
3. Wake up at 5am on a Sunday and congratulate yourself for being a "morning person" by questioning your life choices.
That's because the word is generally considered juvenile - something a child of 2-12 would probably find hilarious. And despite how you might tell them to pronounce it, I'm pretty sure they'd end up calling it "doodoo" anyway, at least mine would.
Take that manager salary and switch to 'Developer' and the salary drops by a few grand, at most. Maybe in some companies - but I'm the lead of a project, responsible for multiple devs, projects, etc, and I'm only getting a few grand more than a dev who's only responsible for their own work...?
I'm surprised no one seems to have mentioned this earlier. Everyone's arguing about what image the icon contains and thinking of imaginary folks who are using computers for the first time after coming off a ship from a lonely desert island.
Back in 'teh day' when my icons were all cutesy skeuomorphs, my computer came with maybe a dozen apps and most of them were on my desktop. Now, I have over a hundred sitting in my global Apps folder alone - never mind user Apps, sub folders, etc.
This gets compounded even more on phones - on my iPhone, I've accidentally placed 1Password next to the Settings app - both have a grey background with a circular center. Settings' center is grey gears, 1Passwords is a blue ring with a keyhole. On examination, they're not similar at all, but I can't even begin to tell you how many times I clicked on when, meaning to click the other - even _knowing_ the differences and kicking myself each time.
I think a lot of what the designers are trying to do is create an icon that stands out visually, and is easily found from amongst a large set of other icons, rather than trying to impress upon us what its functionality is from a metaphor.
Awesome site, thanks for posting! I'm in the the same boat as the OP and just happened to see this thread pop up while investigating, so this at least serves as a good source for comparisons to relatively more expensive options.
I tried sshfs but it's a bear when searching a large remote repository (dev environment is on a t2.micro EC2 instance with a repository of a couple hundred megs, including assets).
I keep a local copy of the repo, which allows me to work even without access to the cloud dev environment and makes searching orders of magnitude quicker, but still saves changes to the remote environment whenever I save a file in Sublime.
It's not perfect, but works well enough for my current workflow, so thought I'd share.
The scene with 'Ghost City'... still sends shivers up my spine. Seeing it on the big screen for the first time in '95, I was blown away.
While it does give us some visual information about the birth of cyborgs (using a female body, causing the mental conflict of finding a cartoon robot 'sexy'), there aren't many movies that will take an almost four minute musical interlude showing random city scenes and the rain falling...
I think it ties in perfectly with Kusanagi's introspection, her pondering on exactly what she is, what the 'ghost' is, etc.
I don't think any of it is wholly original - from Neuromancer to Blade Runner, but it definitely stands on its own as a beautiful film.
I've seen this kind of thing in action. One particular case that sticks out in my memory involved function calls that didn't actually exist but were caught by magic methods and created on the fly. That one took me and another dev a few days to track down. If you find it hard to believe, you're either lucky or are severely underestimating the power of stupid.
I think you're taking Agile as defined in the manifesto out of context a bit too much and making it sound more like a religion (which, if you did, you would probably not be alone in doing).
Agile only makes complete sense when you take it in its historical context as a reaction to other methods, not as a standalone methodology with no history that sprang wholesale from the ground. It's not "this sounds good, let's try this", it's "we tried the other way and it did not work, we need to do something different".
Saying that you have something that works (an MVP, for instance) is _more important than_ documentation. That doesn't mean you shouldn't have documentation. Documentation will always lag behind actual code unless someone is full time updating documentation, which I have yet to see happen anywhere.
And even if you have documentation - it is an agreed communication of intent. The problem is, not everyone is necessarily reading it in the same way, or communicating their intent very well, or realizing inconsistencies and hurdles in what they've communicated. So when you actually have to write the software - you find you can't do it the way it was proposed, the way it was proposed is less efficient or fault tolerant, conflicts with other parts of the design, or is just ambiguous in a way that causes the developer to code up something other than was intended.
In a waterfall design, you wouldn't find out about the ambiguous bits until you present it to the client - at the end of the cycle when it's quite possibly already too late. In an iterative development cycle you can get constant feedback and more easily react to change. That's what agile is really all about.
Change is inevitable - agile attempts to recognize this fact and work as quickly as possible to create a product and immediately and incrementally improve upon it, keeping things moving forward, rather than spending huge amounts of time fussing over details that maybe won't make it into the final product while missing huge discrepancies or 'unknown unknowns' that aren't well understood until something is actually written.
You make some good points about only actually interviewing competent developers and not wasting anyone's time. But in my experience, the take home assignments or coding challenges can often take hours to complete if they are to weed out copy-pasta or dumb luck. For example - "Create a basic CRUD app, with testing, in a configured environment" or some such takes time for me to set up, write, test, and package for delivery.
For me as an interviewee, to have to devote hours of my time doing work for free just to prove that I know how to code, all based on a short phone call, is just as crazy. How do I know your company is one I want to work for? How do I know you're offering the salary and benefits I need? We haven't gotten to that part of the conversation yet and I'm already putting in real hours of work - especially if I have multiple interviewers that ask me to complete code challenges.
It's a catch-22 really. If you have no hurdles, you hire people who don't know what they're doing. If you put too many hurdles, you scare off the folks who don't want to waste hours of their time proving they know the basics. For an interviewer, it's best to get this stuff right up front so you can more effectively screen, but for the interviewee it'd be best that this comes at the end of the process when they know they actually want the job.
All in all, I think this works better for junior level positions because that's where you want to know where folks are at, but hiring senior level people with years of experience, it just gets insulting to have to jump through hoops at every single interview. Of course, I'm a bit burnt out on interviews at the moment, so take that for what it's worth ;)
I'm in the South Bronx and looking to move northward, so anything that's in Brooklyn is a no-go for me - it'd be quicker for me to get to some places in New Jersey. So I definitely feel ya on this one. I think rent is cheaper and a lot of devs are living in Brooklyn these days, so I'm seeing more dev shops opening up down that way, so location is a big deal even when you're in a big metro - emphasis on _big_. Getting from one end of NYC to the other can cost you 2+ hours (each way) depending on trains and whatnot, so it's no little quibble.
In NYC, 50% of all households are rental units, making up about a quarter of the rental units in the entire state. And on top of that, about a quarter of households in the state are rentals. What this data doesn't show, though is how many landlords there are...
If you're drinking whole milk, you're getting a mix of fat and sugar. If you're drinking skim milk, you've removed the fat and kept the sugar. Skim milk's popularity is a result of the low-fat fad (perpetuated by the US government and others) which made everyone scared to eat anything with fat in it. But the fat is actually the good part of milk, so if you don't want the milk fat you're better off picking another drink entirely - like almond milk.