I avoid any company that requires a software test before the interview.

I worked for a company that introduced them after I joined, I collected evidence all of the companies top performers wouldn't have joined since we all had multiple offers and having to do the test would put people off applying. The scores from it didn't correlate with interview results so it was being ignored by everyone. Still took 2 years to get rid of it.

The best place used STAR (Situation Task Action Result) based interviews. The goal was to ask questions until you got 2 stars.

I thought these were great because it was more varied and conversational but there was a comparable consistency accross interviewers.

You would inevitably get references to past work and you switch to asking a few questions about that. Since it was around a situation you would get more complete technical explanations (e.g. on that project I wrote an X and Y was really challenging because of Z).

I loved asking "Tell me about something your really proud off". Even a nervous junior would start opening up after that question.

After an hour interview you would end up with enough information you could compare them against the company gradings (junior, senior, etc..).

This was important because it changed the attitude of the interview. It wasn't a case of if the candidate would be a good senior dev for project X, but an assessment of the candidate. If they came out as a lead and we had a lead role, lets offer them that.

Tactic developed by Wagnar.

The create a plan with fixed waypoints for a squad to run. They plan for 5-8 squads to run the route at set intervals.

The idea is each squad exposes the Ukrainian position so the next squad knows where to attack. By sending so many squads in a short space of time the Ukrainian position is overwhelmed.

Wagner would plan to have the first 4-7 squads made up of convict units with minimal training, with a trained well equipped squad operating as a reserve. The idea being as soon as a Ukrainian position looked to be close to failure the reserve is dispatched.

Fundamentally everyone apart from the well trained reserve exists to soak up bullets and explosives. They are "meat".

The Russian army had "well" trained battalions, as those battalions are attrited it would shrink them down to maintain effectiveness.

With Wagner's success they backfilled the battalions with convict and mobilisation soliders. Those soliders are used following the tactic above with the original remnants of the battalion representing the well trained reserve.

This is how Russia solved their inability to train new soliders

Years ago there was no way to share IDE settings between developers.

You ended up with some developers choosing a tab width of 2 spaces, some choosing 4 spaces and as there was no linting enforcement some people using 2-4 spaces depending on their IDE settings.

This resulted in an unreadable mess as stuff was idented to all sorts of random levels.

It doesn't matter if you use tabs or spaces as long as only one type is consistently used within a project.

Spaces tends to win because inevitably there are times you need to use spaces and so its difficult to ensure a project only uses tabs for identation.

IDE's support converting tabs into spaces based on tab width and code formatting will ensure correct indentation. You can now have centralised IDE settings so everyone gets the same setup.

Honestly 99% of people don't care about formatting (they only care when consistency isn't enforced and code is hard to read), there is always one person who wants a 60 charracter line width or only tabs or double new lined parathensis. Who then sucks up huge amounts of the team time arguing their thing is a must while they code in emacs, unlike the rest of the team using an actual ide.

The linux kernel is very old school in how it is run and originally a big part of the DevSecOps movement was removing a lot of manual overhead.

Moving on to something like Gitea (codeberg) would give you a better diff view and is quicker/easier than posting a patch to a mailing list.

The branching model of the kernel is something people write up on paper that looks great (much like Gitflow) but is really time consuming to manage. Moving to feature branch workflow and creating a release branches as part of the release process allows a ton of things to be automated and simplified.

Similarly file systems aren't really device specific, so you could build system tests for them for benchmarking and standard use cases.

Setting up a CI to perform smoke testing and linting, is fairly standard.

Its really easy to setup a CI to trigger when a new branch/pr is created/updated, this means review becomes reduced to checking business logic which makes reviews really quick and easy.

Similarly moving on to a decent issue tracker, Jira's support for Epic's/stories/tasks/capabilities and its linking ability is a huge simplifier for long term planning.

You can do things like define OKR's and then attach Epics to them and Stories/tasks to epics which lets you track progress to goals.

You can use issues the way the linux community currently uses mailing lists.

Combined with a Kanban board for tracking, progress of tickets. You remove a ton of pain.

Although open source issue trackers are missing the key productivity enablers of Jira, which makes these improvements hard to realise.

The issue is people, the linux kernel maintainers have been working one way for decades. Getting them to adopt new tools will be heavily resisted, same with changing how they work.

Its like everyone outside, knows a breaking the ABI definition from the sub system implementation would create a far more stable ABI which would solve a bunch of issues and allow change when needed, except no one in the kernel will entertain the idea.

Tesla actually market it as a positive.

Car manufacturers have to setup different manufacturing lines to provide different feature levels. Tesla argue this makes them more expensive. Tesla cars have all features installed, just disabled and the optional extra packages are cheaper compared to their rivals as a result.

To be honest there is a certain logic, if you've ever been in a Ford Focus LX (bottom range) its pretty clear they had to spend quite a bit of money on more basic systems. I honestly thought each LX was sold at a loss

No, UK beaches were increasingly becoming the cleanest in Europe.

However that stopped around 13 years ago and the water companies keep emergency dumping waste water.

Your posting this on KBin which implements the twitter style fediverse API and federates with Mastodon.

Click the microblog button ... Behold twitter replacement

If your goal is to advertise the fediverse You should have used 'kbin'.

People can go directly to "lemmy.ml" but the site might disappear due to Mali re-establishing ownership of .ml domains, also its run by a tankie which will upset some people.

"Lemmy" provides 10 google sponsored results and then 'join-lemmy', the join-lemmy website has you 'join a server' and then presents you lots of options.

During the first Mastodon surge one of their issues is people felt overwhelmed by the options and it hurt Mastodon adoption, so a single website does make a lot of sense. Personally I would suggest lemmy.world its a general instance and the admins aren't linked to any extremist views, but you said that would be too long.

If you put 'kbin' into search the top result is kbin.social, that makes it seems like a reddit alternate. It keeps user choice limited and brings them into the fediverse. That means people aren't confronted with the complexity of the fediverse immediately and can learn and understand it at their own pace.

So if your goal is to advertise the fediverse I would push kbin, if your goal is to specifically get people to use a Lemmy based website I don't think you have a good option

I am currently teaching python and JavaScript devs Typescript. Everytime they hit a problem they switch to any

Sigh

Reading the article that isn't the goal.

They are working on controlling access to the wider internet. The goal is to push people off of western services on to ones they control. This is so they can control the information their citizens see

They wouldn't stop Russian bot farms or hacking.

You've just moved the packaging problem from distributions to app developers.

The reason you have issues is historically app developers weren't interested in packaging their application so distributions would figure it out.

If app developers want to package deb, rpm, etc.. packages it would also solve the problem.

This could be achieved within the UI and seems like a good idea.

Each kbin/lemmy instance decides to follow magazines/communities from others through activity pub and stores it locally for the instance.

Having the UI retrieve all local posts with the same magazine/community name (e.g. m/[email protected] c/[email protected]). Wouldn't be hugely difficult, I believe Kbin uses postgres database as the local store. The community/instance should be columns you can search for, it would be a small SQL change.

Even if that wasn't an option, there is a means to get all of the magazines/communities from the kbin UI and retrieve all posts for a specific magazine/community. So you could do it entirely in a web client.

The combined view wouldn't change how you comment on specific posts. The issue is where do you post and what view would take dominance (e.g. if a magazine had themed itself).

The solution here would be to default to the local instance if it exists or the instance providing the most posts/comments. Perhaps with a drop downso users can choose.