Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Confused software developer

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 60 posts

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#51

Post by Bahamut »

eps wrote: post #10
peterhi wrote: post #4

Not wanting to be brutal but if you have 2 years experience of anything then you are no longer a junior. Maybe not actually a senior but certainly not a junior. Junior is like saying trainee. Stop thinking that you are junior. You seem to play down your accomplishments "Just converted some existing HTML(static) sites to dynamic(developed a simple & crude cms like interface to edit the content on the website). I also…

This bullshit spin won't withstand even the most basic technical interview. It will also ensure that he'd come across as a pompous noob who's out of touch with reality. I've been programming for money close to 25 years and I can assure you that the "junior" period covers at least 5 years. Yes, 3 years in you would think that you know a lot, have a boatload of experience and just a wee bit under "senior", but then at…

I have 2 years of experience, and I started holding the formal title of senior software engineer before hitting that mark - I have also passed on lead engineer roles at multiple well known companies already.

This is not an undeserved title either - I have been praised for strength and volume of contributions, improving code and processes. I am about to be promoted as well. Granted, I am probably a rarity, but it is possible to be quite accomplished in that time span.

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#52

Post by smt88 »

kazinator wrote: post #33
smt88 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't take this advice. Don't pretend you have skills that you don't. Also, this guy obviously doesn't know what he's talking about because "Web 2.0" implies social features. The biggest red flag I ever see on a resume is someone incorrectly using Web 2.0 (and anyone who actually knows what it means won't use it). The description was also vague and contained multiple grammatical errors. Yikes.

Web 2.0 did not originally imply social features. You may understand that now, but Web 2.0 originally meant the use of browser-side programming to create a more "desktop like" experience, together with CSS for snazzy layouts, whereas Web 1.0 is more plain HTML, with flow based on form filling and submission. For example, if we compare two webmail applications -- Squirrelmail and RoundCube -- we might identify Squirre…

I apologize to passers-by for how pedantic this is about to get...

First, I don't care how it was coined. I care how I use it now. No modern speaker of language uses all words as they were first used. We use them as they're understood.

Second, while Web 2.0 was coined in obscurity to mean what you describe, it rose to popularity with the understanding of social features[1].

"Social features" simply mean that users can connect to one another and/or generate the value of the site. YouTube is an example of Web 2.0 because it wasn't a publishing platform for established companies as much as a video-sharing platform, where user-generated content was first-class content.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_2.0#Web_2.0

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#53

Post by [deleted] »

smt88 wrote: post #52
kazinator wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web 2.0 did not originally imply social features. You may understand that now, but Web 2.0 originally meant the use of browser-side programming to create a more "desktop like" experience, together with CSS for snazzy layouts, whereas Web 1.0 is more plain HTML, with flow based on form filling and submission. For example, if we compare two webmail applications -- Squirrelmail and RoundCube -- we might identify Squirre…

I apologize to passers-by for how pedantic this is about to get... First, I don't care how it was coined. I care how I use it now. No modern speaker of language uses all words as they were first used. We use them as they're understood. Second, while Web 2.0 was coined in obscurity to mean what you describe, it rose to popularity with the understanding of social features[1]. "Social features" simply mean that users ca…

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#54

Post by kazinator »

smt88 wrote: post #52
kazinator wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web 2.0 did not originally imply social features. You may understand that now, but Web 2.0 originally meant the use of browser-side programming to create a more "desktop like" experience, together with CSS for snazzy layouts, whereas Web 1.0 is more plain HTML, with flow based on form filling and submission. For example, if we compare two webmail applications -- Squirrelmail and RoundCube -- we might identify Squirre…

I apologize to passers-by for how pedantic this is about to get... First, I don't care how it was coined. I care how I use it now. No modern speaker of language uses all words as they were first used. We use them as they're understood. Second, while Web 2.0 was coined in obscurity to mean what you describe, it rose to popularity with the understanding of social features[1]. "Social features" simply mean that users ca…

Note that this sense of Web 2.0 does not replace the original meaning; it's a different nuance. The word "Web" in that nuance refers to "The World Wide Web" as such, and the "2.0" is just a common trope referring to a new improved something. Meet the new me. Me 2.0, if you will.

"Web 2.0", where "web" refers to "web technology", has not disappeared. Though it's something that the average user might not care about, it's not outdated in the same way in which, say, "sensibility" meaning "sensitivity" is outdated. The people who originally used "web 2.0" are still alive and still use it, for one thing.

Do you also think that this site is using "hacker" incorrectly, because the popular new meaning is "electronic criminal", and has been since at least 1980?

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#55

Post by smt88 »

kazinator wrote: post #54
smt88 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I apologize to passers-by for how pedantic this is about to get... First, I don't care how it was coined. I care how I use it now. No modern speaker of language uses all words as they were first used. We use them as they're understood. Second, while Web 2.0 was coined in obscurity to mean what you describe, it rose to popularity with the understanding of social features[1]. "Social features" simply mean that users ca…

Note that this sense of Web 2.0 does not replace the original meaning; it's a different nuance. The word "Web" in that nuance refers to "The World Wide Web" as such, and the "2.0" is just a common trope referring to a new improved something. Meet the new me. Me 2.0, if you will . "Web 2.0", where "web" refers to "web technology", has not disappeared. Though it's something that the average user might not care about, i…

I wasn't suggesting that Web 2.0 has replaced the original meaning of Web. I said that Web 2.0 (meaning a website with user-generated content) has replaced the original, obscure meaning of Web 2.0 (meaning a website with dynamic content).

Your argument that I must disagree with "hacker=geek" because I disagree with "Web 2.0=dynamic" is based on a false premise. I don't care how non-technical journalists use either word. I care how my community (tech professionals) use those words: hacker=geek and Web2.0=social.

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#56

Post by Zigurd »

As others here have pointed out, you don't give us a lot to go by. But here are some points that leap out:

1. If you find Java hard to understand, and not just unappealing too your tastes, do you really understand C#? You may need to focus on basic understanding, no matter what language you choose.

2. Android has a steep-ish learning curve and can punish an incomplete understanding harshly. For just one example, apps and components of apps have a lifecycle you can't just gloss over.

3. What's wrong with the market for C# developers? I don't think picking another area of concentration will help. You may need to get some certification or course completion that shows you have a specific level of C# expertise.

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#57

Post by uaygsfdbzf »

A great way to gain more experience is to contribute to open source.

One way would be to join the Debian mono group to help improve the C#/.NET stack in Linux Mint (they pull packages from Debian):

https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DebianMonoGroup

Similar teams exist in Debian for many all languages.

Re: Ask HN: Confused software developer

#58

Post by kazinator »

smt88 wrote: post #55
kazinator wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that this sense of Web 2.0 does not replace the original meaning; it's a different nuance. The word "Web" in that nuance refers to "The World Wide Web" as such, and the "2.0" is just a common trope referring to a new improved something. Meet the new me. Me 2.0, if you will . "Web 2.0", where "web" refers to "web technology", has not disappeared. Though it's something that the average user might not care about, i…

I wasn't suggesting that Web 2.0 has replaced the original meaning of Web. I said that Web 2.0 (meaning a website with user-generated content) has replaced the original, obscure meaning of Web 2.0 (meaning a website with dynamic content). Your argument that I must disagree with "hacker=geek" because I disagree with "Web 2.0=dynamic" is based on a false premise. I don't care how non-technical journalists use either wo…

Web 2.0 (technology) doesn't mean "dynamic content". In 1994 there was dynamic content with server-side script execution, which solidified into CGI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Gateway_Interface :

"Common Gateway Interface (CGI) is a standard method used to generate dynamic content on Web pages and Web applications. " (emphasis mine)

"History ... In 1993, The NCSA team wrote the specification for calling command line executables on the www-talk mailing list."

Post reply on HN