No I wouldn't think it would be relevant other than to provide more references, specifically because the work is not related.

If you worked at 1 or both of them for 4 years it could serve as am example of how dependable/employable you are but even then they probably won't care as you were at uni so it's not like you have to explain away an employment gap.

Okay I dont think I will mention where I worked during university then. Thanks for the feedback.

Resume advice is always contradictory... so here's my 2 cent take:

* I generally skip right over objectives, unless I want a quick laugh. Things like "I would die happy if I knew I had increased your companies profits by 20%" just aren't believable. And the believable ones, don't really matter. It's very rare that someone has believable objectives that are actually directly related to the company and position.

* Listing skills that don't link to a specific thing somewhere else in the resume are going to be ignored by a lot of people. You might still want to put them to get past computer/hr type screeners though.

* If you have space, I don't mind non-relevant work experience. You're a new grad. It's at least relevant to know that you can hold down a job and were willing to do some form of work.

* I took a quick look at your website and got a broken link to Github. If it works well, sure put it on. If its going to be broken, meh.

* Try to find something that shows you've done something *real* and relevant to a job you want. If you don't have anything, at least try to find something relevant that distinguishes you from all other new graduates (coursework projects aren't that thing). And if you don't have anything, spend time between looking for a job doing something.

Thanks for the feedback. I just met with the head of the CS department at my university yesterday and he said absolutely not to me putting code from class projects I did onto GitHub publicly. I haven't decided what to do after I heard this from him.

suzzer, any wordpress install is going to get bots registering as guests so they can put spam up or use your install for ddos attacks. If you have comments turned off or approval needed they won't be able to do either.

Is he saying this from a what he thinks is best for you point of view or because he doesn't want school projects online?

In school we maintained intellectual property rights for anything we did. I have no idea if thats consistent everywhere, but could be worth checking (not that it would really be enforced).

Got it. I could see it still being a problem if you don't keep them cleaned out and get a bunch of real users at some point. I haven't had any new ones sign up since I added the captcha.

Very impressed with wordpress so far. They seem to have though their plugin system through really well.

They dont want future students to see past student's work.

That's a reasonable concern but it doesn't necessarily need to be your concern. If we're talking small little projects that you spent < ~20 hours on or where you were given sample/starting code, then I'd leave them off.

But if we're talking a major project that has complex ideas, all your own personal code, and you spent a long time on - I'd put it up regardless of what the University wanted (so long as you haven't agreed to anything that gives them the rights to your homework assignment or waived your rights to publish it).

Edit: And of course, real world trade offs apply. If the prof you'll be pissing off is your reference you might want to consider whether the project or the reference is more valuable.

The site I work on is a research community for infosec threats. If you make a post that includes a url, it is usually going to be an indicator of a compromise. Yet, people will sign up and post spam links.

They essentially put themselves on a black list, willingly, thinking they're advertising.

I just submitted an updated site map to google a few days ago - about 2.5 million pages. They've index 315 so far. It takes them so long to get started, sometimes.

I've learned not to sweat that much. I have a few thousand pages, and if you were to get all the url params available, a few trillion.

Months after the mass of the pages were built and submitted via a sitemap, webmaster tools only shows 142 pages indexed. On the other hand, i had a viral article a few weeks back, and a decent portion of the people arrived via google search on day one. i suspect those stats aren't totally correct.

Yeah they may not be. Google can find your pages via other methods than going through your sitemap though - they have over 1 million of our pages indexed already.

I just tested the auto-update thing I wrote and it seems to work ok. You can run the sitemap generator on a regular basis, it adds to the sitemap, and tells google that there are new entries. Google hit those new sitemaps just a few minutes after I pinged them.

They're up to about 10k entries now, all from the newer sitemap files, which is fine by me. If they index the new stuff quick and fill in the old stuff slower, that works great for me.

has anyone ever looked into what are the legal requirements for running a daily fantasy site?

do front end javascript developers use tdd?

none of the tutorials seem to even mention it (even in passing) even though they are 25 hours long.

No

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

You don't want to do this.

If you don't do it I will have saved you a lot of money/time.

I know someone who works for Fandango - apparently they do real TDD on the front end. Where I work we say we do on slides, but we don't actually.

stupid new phone

I received this job posting that includes:

yikes

That sounds a lot like my last company. I think true QA departments are on the way out and you'll be expected to "own your code" and be agile enough to fix it quickly and redeploy. Possible, but adding breakfix to sprints ****s the schedule pretty quickly, which leads to corner cutting, which leads to bugs...

I haven't had a QA department / person to work with in years. And I quite like it.

Not to say they aren't useful, but I think the costs are worse than the benefits in most cases (but definitely not all).

They have a couple proprietary languages? Does this mean they wrote not one, but multiple languages to do their work?

That sounds legacy.

I think that's a defensible point. The other bullet points on the other hand:

Emphasizing this up-front is a huge warning sign that the management has trouble measuring output and thus values appearance of hard work, such as late hours and working on weekends and has had issues with people not putting up with this.

This may be a Daily WTF candidate and "willingness to learn" being important in this context (proprietary languages) is a sign that it's not something you'd actually want to learn.

This should not have to be mentioned if you have any kind of reasonable hiring standards - it's a sign that they don't really know how to screen technical candidates and have hired complete deadweights who could't program in the past.

Is it normal for engineers to always want more documentation? While of course not writing it for code they write.

A number of our engineers are always asking for documentation on how to do various rare support tasks or exactly what the problem is when a bug is reported. It seems like nobody is interested in just walking through the relevant code to learn how it works or why it's failing.

So first, is this normal? Second, how have you guys addressed it?

Also, I'm thinking about moving on from my current company and doing the work to get a job at Google/Facebook. Any tips or things to be aware of?