I think some of it may also come with the amount of guidance and mentoring those people require.
Early in your career, the best thing for you to do is to acquire knowledge -- not raw output. The open office allows for knowledge sharing and eavesdropping in ways closed offices do not. However, as you progress you require less 1:1 time with people and can work independently given a set of goals and general architecture. This requires less face time and more coding time.
I think the skill set changes with experience but the problems given in interviews don't vary much. For example, a fresh grad is more likely to be able to correctly implement merge sort from memory than a sr. engineer because of how recently they were asked this problem before. Whereas a sr. engineer should be able to better think through "soft skill" problems like estimations, expectation alignment, and how to deploy complicated changes with little impact to the business.
I've come to learn coding is the easy part. Where it gets tricky is when you introduce other people.
This is one of the reasons I'm eyeing management for long term career growth. I've learned that the problems given to sr. and jr. engineers are roughly the same, and that the interview process is biased towards jr.
That was just one of the more succinct sources I could find at the time. Here is an article from the Washington Post which details the subsequent lawsuit against the police department (which they lost).
Also, if you're interested in hydroponics (especially indoor) and live within the US, be careful how you buy the materials needed to start. The police are known to profile these customers and raid the houses several months later [0].
What do you duo instead? I want to get into embeded/systems development or marine (ship systems) development -- but the vast majority of that work seems to be DoD and/or require more than Public Trust clearance which I refuse to get.
Web Dev is just so easy to get, and pays well, at the moment the temptation is hard to ignore.
This hasn't been twitter's objective for a long time now. The idea that twitter caters or cares about power users (in my opinion) was put to rest when they decided to severely limit apis and third party tooling years ago.
As a company, they want to be as big as possible which means power users are not their target audience.
That feature drove me, a technologist and casual social media user, to use twitter regularly for the first time.
I simply don't have the time or the interest to keep up with a long stream of tweets. It allows me to catch some highlights, and then move on to the never ending live stream.
I would use other news sites, but that doesn't mean they would have the same culture. The culture of a site is allowed to exist by the site owners and if no site owner wanted 4chan's culture than they would just weed them out as they attempted to migrate.
We could get rid of 4chan's culture by extinguishing the voice of it, and as long as no one else allows that voice on their site then it ceases to exist.
> Another person points out that even if you hate 4chan (or especially if you do), it'd be better left intact to contain the culture that foments there. Otherwise we might see /r/The_Donald style posts all over the internet.
I can't help but to think this is pure fear mongering.
Early in your career, the best thing for you to do is to acquire knowledge -- not raw output. The open office allows for knowledge sharing and eavesdropping in ways closed offices do not. However, as you progress you require less 1:1 time with people and can work independently given a set of goals and general architecture. This requires less face time and more coding time.