It's been tried and failed: Sun Microsystems pushed certifications in the 90s. Pass the test on some technology, get the certification. Then they studied performance. The result? More certifications implied a worse employee. The reason was the top performing employees had no time to study for the exams, but the managers of the bottom performing employees were happy to send them off to training and testing. And then the certification fad came mostly to an end.
That was something quite different that got tried. This would be more based on aptitude rather than knowledge.
Of course, they'd miss out on some good talent. But in the article where it shows the quote of someone getting rejected for not inverting a binary tree on a whiteboard, that doesn't seem like a terrible thing to test for.
To expand on this, if they tried to land on the water planet where time so dilated that one hour equals 7 months… what would their velocity have been when they contacted the surface? And how much energy did their spaceship need to reach escape velocity from there?
Speedify | Senior Software Engineer | Location: Philadelphia, PA | ONSITE at once per week | Full Time
At Speedify we make complex networking tasks easy by developing apps that deliver faster, more reliable, and more secure Internet to users all across the globe.. We now have millions of customers using Speedify, the only app that can combine multiple internet sources into one bonded super-connection for more stable and secure livestreaming, video calling, and web browsing.
Speedify’s engine is powered by C++, and if you want to make the Internet faster and more reliable, we want to hear from you! Speedify is based in Center City, Philadelphia, PA. This is a hybrid role that expects employees to work in the office at least one day per week.
* Proficiency in C/C++
* 5+ years of experience in software development
* Improve and extend our C++ packet processing engine
Oh, I remember you! We've made major changes to the protocol since then. Connections with as much latency and loss as you had cannot be maxxed out by a single TCP connection.
We now default to a mode that uses up to 8 TCP connections in parallel on each internet connection to let us reach the full speed of connections even if they have latency and loss that limits the performance of TCP.
We'd love to get you to try it again. Email us at support@speedify.com and we'd get you a license to reevaluate.
Biggest issue I have with speedify if not being able to use my own server... You can get a dedicated box from them, but it's 100$+ per month on top of the standard plan... And it's still managed by them... I already have my own hardware, and if I wanted to use this for business purposes, my legal and security teams would not approve it being managed by others... I have had good results bonding multiple lte connections, but using my own server would make it a lot better...
Yes, speedify has a lot of smarts around packet loss. It uses up to 8 TCP connections in parallel to avoid slow downs based on loss.
But for the kind of burst of massive loss you describe, I'd suggest having a secondary connection it can use that during the bursts of loss. A cellular connection could be used just during these times to smooth it out.
Actually Speedify on your phone is pretty good for that. If the hotspot doesn't work, it fails over to the LTE automatically so the bad hotspots never knock you offline.
We still have the 2GB per month free tier with no registration. It's available everywhere but Linux... unfortunately, without us doing anything really creepy (which we won't do), it was just too common for Linux users to trick us into endlessly starting the 2GB over. I think there was a script for automating it making the rounds on some sites.
Alex from Speedify here. Yes, we make a multi-path VPN tunnel, so that calls can be shifted from one link to another without glitches (apps see the same IP address the whole time). To make this work, we do some smart things like retransmit packets that were just sent on the failed link, on the still-working link since they were likely to have been lost.
No, I can’t really imagine what that means, either.