To get to brass tacks: some groups continue to be bitter over Musk due to a self-created petty, political, disagreement. They want their safe spaces back. Like a child upset that the people she kicked out of her birthday party are back.
Threads is going to fail because you would need various social groups of large representation to move en masse e.g. African Americans. Last I checked Black Twitter isn't going anywhere over some petty disagreement over Musk. Anyone migrating (I.e. leaving Twitter while simultaneously going to Threads) is in a small bubble.
Threads is going to be the "Twitter killer" just like Mastodon was supposed to be. Everyone declaring success already hated Twitter to begin with. They have the Musk-hating media behind them writing slanted articles. I've already read the doom and gloom headlines this morning. Instagram sucks and everyone I know hates it. This was the Hail Mary pass to save it because Meta is out of ideas.
What a silly story. They applied for a job that made it clear they were looking for someone who could proficiently program, and they couldn't do it. So they didn't get the job. What a surprise.
Asking for a list of tasks that will come up or code examples is particularly naive. Technical jobs aren't a laundry list of exact needs.
Being an engineer in any field requires versatility, including the ability to solve problems on your feet and to learn new technology, or to learn tech you already know to a greater depth, at the drop of a hat.
This is one of the few times I've ever read a story about impostor syndrome where the story teller actually was an impostor. Bizarre.
I think you missed the point of the story, which was that the company was asking for a combination of skills that never exist in the same person. An unicorn. In that context it is reasonable to assume that if you have the core competency (in this case design skills, not coding), then you should apply.
Also fizz buzz has nothing to do with the kind of programming that was expected from the job description. Now you might reasonably object that fizz buzz is supposed to be something so rudimentary that any programmer could implement. But the point is UI/UX people don't typically do any algorithms work at all. Their interaction with JS is often just to call an API and shove the resulting data where it needs to be in the DOM. They may never have to use a loop, ever. Or conditional testing. Or think about infinite sequences. To a proper software engineer like you or me fizz buzz seems ridiculously simple. But I could totally see a UX designer whose only interaction with self-taught JS is to glue APIs together being tripped up.
> I think you missed the point of the story, which was that *the company was asking for a combination of skills that never exist in the same person.*
I've asked the people I work with that have this combination of skills but, unfortunately, they all popped out of existence the moment the question left my mouth.
Her point about the title "engineer" being in nearly every job posting while basically conferring zero meaning is definitely on point, but her mock outrage about being asked an extremely rudimentary programming question surprised me given that one of the requirements of the job was JavaScript...
In this context, I was expecting another unusual/proficient implementation of FizzBuzz. I didn't enjoy this story about someone who was asked FizzBuzz in an interview and didn't think the position should require her to know that.
No, you need to go back and read it again. According to her story, it said:
“ HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript.
I’m a master at the first two, but since there was no mention of programming stuff and the responsibilities section was so design-centric, I figured my jQuery proficiency and capacity to self-teach would suffice.”
The entire job description read like a UI/UX designer with a minimal understanding of JavaScript.
Her point is that if they wanted a software engineer then they should have hired one. She isn’t trying to be one.
> Experienced with Object Oriented JavaScript and modern JavaScript libraries such as Ember, Backbone, or Angular.
There's no version of a person who meets this requirement that cannot fizzbuzz. They put engineer in the title of the position.
"UX Engineer" is a completely reasonable title for someone who uses Javascript, HTML, and CSS to build web frontends. That person is absolutely a programmer, and absolutely must be able to fizzbuzz (and much, much more).
I understand that you are not familiar with the difference between basic qualification and preferred qualification.
In HR parlance, if the person meets the BQs then they are considered qualified. If someone comes along and you have two equals but the one of the two had the preferred then they are the preferred candidate. Preferred candidate would be expected to know fizzbuzz.
The part you pasted was in the preferred qualifications.
Also engineer term is overloaded here which is also her point
If you cannot fizzbuzz you are not basically qualified. Fizzbuzz is the basic qualification test. If you cannot do conditionals and remainder you cannot be expected to be reasonably proficient enough to do anything else of note in the language.
This is not a point of contention. It is the entire point of fizzbuzz. Fizzbuzz was designed to stop wasting interviewer time by filtering out people who could never in any way be construed to be qualified for a position that involved writing code.
She’s complaining that the job description didn’t mention coding as a requirement, but it actually says “deliver solid, reliable code”..?
And fizzbuzz is not a math problem. I’m sure the interviewer would’ve even given her a hint if she came as far as writing a loop and writing the different branches but not figuring out how to differentiate the cases. I’d shrug that off as nervousness perhaps.
Reading all the comments on there about people not knowing how to write fizz buzz was actually scary.
I get that fizz buzz isn't a useful project or whatever, but it's not like you have to be a genius to figure it out. Someone mentioned needing CS161 or something... Not really a requirement, more like knowing how to write basic code.
I love this story because I run across jobs all the time that sound great in the title and then you read the job description - it often sounds like a list of buzzwords or a combination of multiple people into one job. It’s like she says, they lumped everything into one position.
Really wish one of these interviewers, in the middle of peppering him with solicitations for opinions on Titan, would ask James Cameron the important question on everyone's mind: why hasn't he released True Lies on Blu Ray yet.
How is it possible that these companies are still run like an immature dorm room shitshow? Are there no separation of duties? The CEO should not have admin access to anything (the very least for security purposes).
He was correct to do this, because it was funny. Any true longtime forum poster would recognize this. (Conversely, if it wasn't funny, he should've done it differently.)
Although doing Lowtax things may lead to turning into Lowtax, which is probably bad.
I can certainly tell you it's not a serious problem, because it'd be illegal if it was. All serious problems with websites are revenue issues or legal issues.
It wasn't funny, and he didn't make any jokes. He edited "fuck spez" comments to remove spez and substitute other mods.
Fuck r/the_donald - but that's just blatant admin power misuse to deflect criticism. Very topical with all the "fuck u/spez" comments going around these days.
Admin abuse is inherently funny. It's like slapstick. It was funny on SA when the users paid to sign up in the first place, and it can only be more so when they're not even paying customers.
Should've made it a wordfilter though. Those are more participatory.
(You won't take this advice, which is why I've run a large popular internet forum before and you haven't.)
I think you're a very small minority in that opinion, my friend. Perhaps leadership decisions like that are why you refer to your forum in the past tense now?
You will never be able to perfectly tickle everyone's funny bone with a given joke, but most everyone agrees that the role of forums is to offer a funny experience, and a good admin will play a significant role in making that happen. One does not spend their preciously scarce free time on an Internet forum if there is nothing funny about it.
Sorry, I must have misunderstood your definition of hilarity. There was a lot of discussion elsewhere about a specific type of humor. The trolling/random kind of humor.
I completely agree, when he did that is was pretty funny (but a little pathetic he didn't dare to ban these users or this sub, either for money or political reasons).
Users reacted poorly and "shocked" site wide somehow that an admin could exerts admin right and edit database which as a sysadmin made me laugh a lot because I get occasional similar ones from our users when we do admin stuff.
It's not funny when the victim isn't in on the joke and is distressed by it.
(Sure, the victim was (probably) a highly unsympathetic and stupid person. What justification is that? It's schoolyard-bully sociology to attack unsympathetic weirdos. Most bullies grow out of it and live with regrets. But 'spez is a fucking adult! What's he doing lurking in the worst subreddits of (his own) website, searching for prey to gaslight? What's the character of a grown-ass man who does that?)
No, whether the user is sympathetic or not isn't important, and I don't think there's anything noble about punishing users you don't like. It's just a misconception about what's important in internet forums. If you're a random free account you sometimes get nobly sacrificed (via admin abuse) for the entertainment of the masses and thus benefit society as a whole.
Basically, it's PvP. This is pretty obvious from the design; you post and people reply to you, which they mostly use to argue with you. An example of a product designed for people to be nice to each other is Discourse, which isn't much like HN or reddit.
People do have human rights, which is why I said what matters is if it's illegal or not. Putting slanderous posts under their name would be a real issue - if you think this happened go ahead and sue him - but the most common one would be doxxing: posting your IP and personal info from the admin console. Which he's probably got access to.
If you base your social conduct entirely on what's legal and illegal, you'll become a pariah very fast.
Spez is the perfect example of this. His editing of the comments cemented his reputation as corrupt and stupid, and from then on everything he communicated towards the community received a much stronger backlash than it otherwise would have, regardless of how unpopular the decision actually was.
This is confusing "the community" with "overly engaged parts of the community".
Normal reddit users don't know any inside baseball facts about the site. The normal users are those people who post the same basic "women, what's the sexiest sex you ever sexed?" questions on askreddit once a week.
Of course, their site design makes this a problem since it relies on mods, who are specifically that kind of person since they do it for free.
>>I can certainly tell you it's not a serious problem, because it'd be illegal if it was
that seems to be a very poor reasoning. If your honest contention that all things that are a problem are illegal (thus one can assume then also that you 100% agree with all laws on the books as well) seems then we have no societal problems, and the government and laws work perfectly... Thus no need to elections, or changes to those laws.
No, but certainly if you think something is a problem you should lobby to make future instances of it illegal. If you don't, it's basically not worth the time of an admin/CEO to care what you think, because they have so much else going on.
A common theme on social media is that a group of people care about something and want to ban it, but instead of changing the law, instead they self-enforce their pseudo-laws by yelling at people who violate them. Complaining about the mods being an example, another being fanartists who have a ton of rules about "sourcing your art reposts"/not tracing, another being that 2014 period where everyone went around GitHub projects trying to shame the owners for not having a code of conduct.
This might be because they're anarchists and don't want to call the figurative cops, but usually it's because they're a minority and there isn't actually popular support for it.
wow.. I dont even know really were to begin to unpack this.
So you position is that totalitarianism to the extreme is the only way? That everything, every action, every social convention, every interaction between two people should be under the purview of some law or regulation.
I am not a big fan of codes of conduct, as such I damn sure do not want the government creating a law around code of conduct. If some open source project wants to enact a stupid CoC I want the freedom to fork that project and replace with either a CoC free project or a competing one with a different CoC.
government is not empowered, nor should it be empowered to government what social media ban's, or the conduct of developers interacting with each other on a open source project
If you are upset about an interaction between a CEO of a company and a customer of the company, as in this thread, then yes that is the kind of thing we have laws for.
In the other examples there are other levels of "government" that have "regulations" that are more official than nothing that you could lobby. You could get GitHub to change the ToS to require CoC, or Twitter to ban certain kinds of things artists don't like, rather than just be personally mean to other users on the site about it.
Isn't "reddit isn't a real company, it's a dorm room shitshow" supposed to be the appeal of reddit? A 'real company' wouldn't have a free-for-all API to allow third parties to leach their ad revenue.
> A 'real company' wouldn't have a free-for-all API to allow third parties to leach their ad revenue.
Or they might have realised that third parties are crucial to their success (they have the stats, they know what % of traffic, commenters, power users, etc. are using third-party apps) and instead added more constraints around the API, like also serving ads (like Telegram), lower rate limits for unauthenticated users, forcing oauth etc. Instead of going the nuclear path of making any third party downright unviable and thus forcing them to shutdown.
Your list of first-world grievances also describes: healthcare workers, literally anyone in the trades, grocery store employees, retail, etc. At some point tech employees have convinced themselves that they are likewise "essential" employees and deserving of special exceptions. But the fact of the matter is most tech jobs, apps, etc. could go away tomorrow and life would continue unabated (in contrast to the list above). Sure, with mild inconveniences, but society will find a way. It also proves how easily replaceable you are by employees in developing countries who are glad to show up in person to the office (for 1/6th the pay).
Also, who doesn't bring their own coffee from home vs. drinking the three-day-old moldy diarrhea at the office?
My old offices had two espresso machines and a drip machine, all cleaned on a bi weekly cadence by professionals. Fresh coffee arrived from a local roasters every Monday morning. Seven different varieties of milk are provided for the frother. Much better than my home setup... And yet here I am, still working from home.
I hope this serves as an example of why tethering your understanding of working needs to your extremely limited experience - as it is for all of us - makes your argument a bunch of weak anecdotes that add little to the debate.
Talking of limited experience - you think that the tech industry can disappear overnight and life will just "continue unabated"? Yikes.
"We can always go back to the stone ages", sure, sure we can.
> controversial ads promoting things like gambling and marijuana
Oh no not gambling and marijuana as I drive past the casino and weed store on my way home. What other heinous degeneracy could Twitter devolve into next, maybe unfiltered cigarettes and cheap beer.
> Do we have a federated Mastodon-esque system to replace Reddit yet?
Maybe they can go to whatever platform the banned subreddits reformed on. Unfortunately many of the subreddit communities that are now being screwed over in the same fashion by Reddit were cheering on that behavior when others were targeted.
2. Airplanes have high standards for design and manufacturing as errors have serious consequences. Boeing has recent failures and deserves to be under a microscope.
I believe you're quite wrong. I read the article. They discovered some minor non-conformance that's not safety related and are fixing it. Airplanes are incredibly complex machines with millions of parts. Scaling this analogy it's like a finding a minor manufacturing issue with the iPhone's PCB. Which probably happens all the time and you'd never know or hear about it. I can't think of a single Apple product I've owned that didn't have some defect that required a widespread "repair program" to resolve.
I'd be willing to wager there's an endless discussion on the Talk page about this, where someone is arguing that the Vatican is wrong about their own flag, and they should be the ones to change.
Threads is going to fail because you would need various social groups of large representation to move en masse e.g. African Americans. Last I checked Black Twitter isn't going anywhere over some petty disagreement over Musk. Anyone migrating (I.e. leaving Twitter while simultaneously going to Threads) is in a small bubble.
Threads is going to be the "Twitter killer" just like Mastodon was supposed to be. Everyone declaring success already hated Twitter to begin with. They have the Musk-hating media behind them writing slanted articles. I've already read the doom and gloom headlines this morning. Instagram sucks and everyone I know hates it. This was the Hail Mary pass to save it because Meta is out of ideas.