Go to school to learn all this data structures and do these fancy whiteboard tests at Microsoft.
Your day-to-day? Meetings. Maintaining some tiny element of code.
Even scientists. The schooling they have is sophisticated. Really intricate thoughts. Then they're just using lab equipment. Paperwork. Convention.
They're not on the cusp of single-handedly unlocking unsolved mysteries in physics. Their whole role as a spoke in the wheel depends on using bullshit to obfuscate 90% of the trade could be done by technicians.
Don't be fooled. Everybody is a cog in the system, and until they've actually shown bona fides they've invented something practical themselves, there's no reason to assume that stranger is as brilliant as they make themselves out to be.
OK, so you're sincere. You have a genuine intellectual interest. Good heart. And an honest worker.
But the brutal world of supply and demand, no one cares about your feelings, honesty, or character. Which is why you are, in my opinion, a victim of code camps.
Did you ever read there was a skill gap for programmers? A shortage of programmers? You were lied to. Completely and totally.
> my problem is I need an income. What you're giving is resources for learning above, but that is not where my choke point is.
And here's the problem with that. Codecamps are also destroying the job market on a macro level too.
We're placing, what, 1000 new junior javascript/ruby grads into the job seeking pool every 16 weeks?
That's stacked on top of what, thousand of other code camp grads who didn't land a job?
And how many positions do you think there is to fill? Maybe in USA, 500 or 800, and most of those want prior work experience.
Not to mention that employers are using H1B's as a way to get cheap labor. There's no end in sight.
You should demand your money back, contact the FCC and a lawyer.
See the above? This is what codecamps do to innocent people. They prey on the weak, act authoritative, and take advantage of their hopes of getting jobs.
You should demand your money back, every penny.
> I can only look to my choice of bootcamp
Bootcamps are not gatekeepers. They portray themselves as such to take your money.
There's no such thing as an elite bootcamp. It's a lie to pray on your naïveté of the industry. It's just ruby and javascript. It's web development. Nothing magic. Nothing elite here. You could teach it in a community college setting for 2k a semester.
But every town needs electricians, plumbers, doctors, etc.
It's just frankly, we're pouring out more junior programmers desperate for jobs than there are positions to fill. Every time a cohort finishes, it's 30 more people on top of the thousands of others seeking a handful of positions.
They end up creating junior level programmers, and cherrypicking success stories from people who have already coded before.
Maybe you would be a good programmer if you continued studying, maybe it's not your path.
I don't know you, but don't be fooled into thinking that any institution or person is a gatekeeper from you coding and getting a job in it. These code camps want you to believe that so they can justify their existence.
> Bootcamp grad here who mentioned it prominently in my resume and blogged my experience and put up a YouTube video once a week while I was going through.
Mind telling us who you are so we can take a look at your code and background? YouTube channel and GitHub would be helpful for us in assessing what you learned when you went to the bootcamp.
> I'm not sure who filters out bootcamp grads, but I can say Google, FB, Apple, Netflix, and many many YC companies reached out to me repeatedly and I ended up working at a YC startup.
Why did you end up working at a startup? YC startups are great. But they're still not Apple.
Well you wanted to come in, namedrop all these companies. Despite how popular you are with Google, Apple, Facebook, you don't even manage to mitigate or point out the survivorship bias.
Codecamps spend 24-7 canvassing threads like this shilling to innocent people dreams of 100k jobs and working at Google. The people who get taken advantage of have no voice, and are drowned out.
How about you show us your credentials so we can see?
If not, it's hard to give your account credibility. There had to be a reason why you were such a celebrity with all these companies, have a YouTube, but can't show it.
I got paid to learn to program. 45k a yr to start off with. Then 70k a few months later.
You don't need to pay a school to learn to code.
The sad truth is, there are recruiters who will throw out your resume if you associate with bootcamps. Why? Because the quality of the programmers they generate is low.
Code camps run like mills. From stories I've heard, they pay instructors as contractors below market rate (20-50k, long long hours) and throw them away with no severance.
That's not even to speak about those who forked over $16,000 you'll never hear of here because they're too embarrassed and afraid they'll get jumped.
Worse, try mentioning anything critical on Bootcamps and they'll create sock puppet accounts to downvote you, harass you and so on.
If you don't believe me, go on /r/cscareerquestions or quora threads mentioning bootcamps. They'll have coursereport.com shilling and trying to keep you from the reality:
I've never heard of their products before. And they've been around for a heck of a long time in these boards with these salaries, and there was no SEC Form D's back then.
> Hand-optimized assembly drawing routines for arm6/7
> Create a particle engine which maps to webgl shaders, pure Javascript, or optimized C
> Rebuild backwards compatible Android APIs
> Context-aware code parser for automatic internationalization & localization code parser
> Analytics platform, terabytes of data every week, real-time processing.
> Scale real-time notifications and chat to hundreds of millions of game players
> Create a particle engine which maps to webgl shaders, pure Javascript, or optimized C
> js.io is a new IDE for HTML5 Apps / Games, AR, VR, Minecraft mods, Arduino, IoT, and more, targeting javascript as a common language. We provide developers their own persistent container, a beautiful end-to-end development experiences, r remote-over-LTE (sic) debugging, one click publishing, and carefully polished community support. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12204213
So... where's the IDE for Minecraft mods, Arduino, IoT... it seems to be an IDE that does everything! Through javascript, remember: "Cross-compiling javascript to other languages and vice versa". OK? Where is it? https://github.com/blackstormlabs? https://github.com/weebygames? I see forked repos of Flask and React. How is that going to get you transpiling for Minecraft mods, arduino and IoT? Let alone the abstraction to the API's.
> js.io is a multi-platform package management and module system for JavaScript. js.io modules can be evaluated in a JavaScript runtime (e.g. node.js) or precompiled into a single package for use on the client side.
It hasn't been updated in over a year, but it does have 600+ stars. No sign of the millions of players, no hand-optimized asm drawing routines, context-aware code parsers or terabyte analytic platforms.
Nothing adds up.
I look forward to an explanation of where these SEC filings for Game Closure, Weeby and Blackstorm are at. Also, where are the "terabytes of data every week, real-time processing" analytics. The "hundreds of millions of game players". Where are the hard core "Hand-optimized assembly drawing routines".
Could you explain the discrepancy or please correct your salary information so people don't waste their time interviewing when it's not your intention to fit the salary you specified?
Not trying to cause a scene, but interviewed for a few places with high salaries and after sincerely following their interview process, realized they were just giving a widely inflated salary to get resumes in.
It may be a "junior" engineer. But still, you're posting 140k as a minimum range in the post currently when glassdoor says 97k and DoL says 102k.
Maybe I'm mistaken. Not making accusations, just want to give you a chance to clarify things.
It's indefensible to have code that tightly compacted, throwing functions around and not documented.
Don't care if it's Python (basically pseudocode), Javascript, Haskell or Erlang.
For all the time Haskell commenters turn criticism into a Socratic dialog, they could be considering ways to make their code digestable. It's been what, 20 years now?
Not just to non-haskell programmers, but all the haskell programmers I see swarming around threads like these on the internet; you'd think they'd actually be teaming up and collaborating with each other. I can't put my finger on it, I think there's a trend, a feeling, that it's not suitable for programmers focused on achieving business ends. It's more of a hobby thing
Programming in the enterprise means confronting the reality that there are design trade-offs and someone else has to read the code. Haskell programmers seem to go off the deep end trying to pull off a hack of making haskell work a certain way, then its "pencils down", sayonara. The real world doesn't accept that, programs have to be maintained by others.
> languages with other features/language constructs than you're used to just seem worthless, complex, without value and foreign to you.
Document the Haskell code and not stuff so much logic into one line. I think that's a fair thing to ask for in software engineering.
Anyone who complains about Haskell seems to have either a.) not programmed it b.) weren't programming "correctly" c.) a xenophobe/blub/NOS
I know what lambdas are, I know there are functions and folds. That in and of itself doesn't tell the story of the data that's actually being manipulated and the expected output. So that's why you have a 20-30 line comment block explaining what's going on in important API functions.
You could program python, JS or ruby similarly; wrapping multiple functions on the same line until you have to actually trial each function to figure out why your not getting an expected result. It feels clever, at the moment, but we don't do it because we're not helping colleagues understand it.
> You're not willing to learn the language because you don't understand it, and dismiss the language as having no value because you don't understand it. Is that really fair without at least having a basic understanding of the language?
The commenter was heralding the project as a "great example" of "real-world haskell" and recommended contributing to it. I was shocked to see 8k stars and a paltry 50 contributors; of which, only the top 10 have contributed over 100 lines of code. That's half the contributors, proportionally, to something like neovim or redis, and even worse compared to node.js projects.
And, I looked at the code of the project, which is open source, and didn't see code documentation.
I'm trying to be generous. My advice: stop packing the code so close and document it, probably more than normal, since the symbology in their is highly dense.
Despite 15 years of programming experience in python, js, C, etc. I feel like I'm going to have to duck my head down to be chastised for not understanding the language and not being "intelligent" enough to see the depth.
It looks like jibberish, to me. Not trying to be offensive. I'm sure the person who written it had it make sense to them. You likely also notice, a lack of code documentation. Bad form. Don't tell me it's because I don't know haskell, that's why I'm not expending the time to learn it, despite the buzz.
Meanwhile, SQLAlachemy and Hibernate isn't reporting complaints and a human being could actually parse it to understand what the hecks going on there. And despite it being Python or Java - easier and far more widely adopted languages - they're documented extensively, the authors didn't solipsistically assume others would "get it".
Which is a pattern I've been seeing with hardcore functional advocates in communities. They are the kind of people who'd work 2 weeks on a paper for a mathematical proof, shove it to you in the hallway to look smart, and say "It's obvious". It's not, you're just trying to show you're smart, but no one's understanding you - and that is important in you winning people over and not looking arrogant.
> It's concise for the amount of functionality it offers
Make it 4 times as many lines. Because there is so much condensed inside of this.
>8k stars. Less than 50 contributors. Of which, only the top 7 changes more than 100 lines.
If this considered a real world haskell, it's no wonder there's not a lot of people using it.
It does more to demonstrate functional programmers lack empathy for enterprise ones. Because even with solid grasp of CS concepts, even Haskell's own proponents are having a hard time stomaching contributing to it.
Golang irritates people for various reasons. For some reason I've begun to feel the language is was partly designed to put prima donnas who push theoretical languages in blogs all day rather than ship in their place.
These Haskell and Scala people talk talk talk all about correctness and syntax tricks. Meanwhile golang is nimble and just winning every race. I wish they'd learn from it rather than get so defensive.
Also, it's just a confirmation people get too attached to complicated features in languages as a crutch. YAGNI
Programming can be straight-forward and clear. Without it spiraling into a contest of clever tricks. You look clever when you get product out the door.
I've been programming 10 years professionally, and 15 years as a hobby. I've yet to hear what a sum type is until yesterday.
I got nothing wrong with people dabbling and hacking on the weekend, but sometimes it irks me when people split hairs over being "correct" and never actually get stuff done.
I think a lot of the "syntax tricks" is a mechanism used by people to feel superior. It's like, "hey if I can't actually build something useful, at least I can blog about how to write a monad transformer".
I'm not trying to be offensive, I'm just failing to see the value in this and trying to make sense of what I'm seeing. Where was the business issue that could only be solved through sum types in the language syntax? Enlighten me.
Also, I looked through your history, you're a Haskell programmer. Due to the context of my thread, I'd appreciate it if you disclosed your relation so others know.
> AwesomeWM lists Lua as a feature
It's a scripting language on top of that's used for configuration.
> It's pretty similar to saying "code has been tested extensively by our quality assurance team" or something "code has been formally verified,"
The problem is Haskell developers aren't really getting enough shipped, especially relative to the advocacy I see of it. So how much does code correctness matter?
Look, let's say I want play FreeCiv. It being programmed in C vs Haskell vs Erlang doesn't mean much to me.
But imagine if FreeCiv lacked basic functionality or code documentation, and when people mentioned these things they'd get jumped by people who advocate it being programmed in an esoteric language who look down on those who program C as unsafe, inefficient, etc.
> So you haven't made up your mind already by criticizing Haskell before even evaluating it as a language? It's not making up your mind on it when you based all your judgements from personal anecdotes of Haskell and Scala programmers you've met before?
Hugo vs Pandoc
Awesome/i3 vs xmonad
You want to know why these solutions got more popular than the their Haskell predecessors? They had devops like documentation and tooling down. They picked languages that were easier to read so the community could participate. The discussion was about how to ship features by a version release, not how to force the language to get a purely internal technical working.
Users can't see the internals, so they don't care. They want something that's there for them on time and reliably. In all these years to this day, there's been more advocating Haskell philosophically on forums than there's been real discussion about getting stuff shipped. Try saying that for node/go/ruby/python.
I'm not happy about how that thread went down. I'm not going to breath more life into it.
As for the subthread, there's a two hour limit to edit/delete, heh. I had an email draft open about removing one of the subthreads.
I'd like to be able to go back to edit https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14519547 and just let people know what free resources exist w/o the bootcamp comments.