Yes, but a junior developer's role in any company regardless of size is most definitely not to come in and say how they could do it better and the company should change their workflow.

I totally agree, but the value that a junior developer can bring to the table is a pair of unbiased eyes. It's what I look for when new developers join any existing team I am on: what can they see that we can't.

At some point in the growth of a human being, we are discouraged from continually asking "Why?" and from questioning things we see. This is largely a bad idea, so showing junior devs that they are in a position to ask questions and help lead everyone to a better solution is great!

> It's what I look for when new developers join any existing team I am on: what can they see that we can't.

Based on my experience, it would be unrealistic for a junior developer to expect this perspective at a new job. More realistic: here are the things that need to be done for this business to survive; please do them. Maybe some leeway in how you approach the problem. If they wanted unbiased eyes, the job listing would have said consultant, not junior developer.

Believe me, I hear what you're saying. I've tried it many times. For instance: "You don't check everything into source control? Oh my god, it's so basic, look how much better you guys could be doing your jobs!" Which, yeah, it would have been better. It also annoyed the people around me and destabilized the team, even as it improved the technology. Net loss for the company.

Having made this mistake over and over, I want to help others avoid it. Junior developers, know that if you find success in your job, your most important contributions to the company will not have been code. You will not bring some great insight to the table that makes everything faster/better/cheaper and wins you everyone's respect. You earn respect and admiration by working hard (not smart, hard!) and helping the people around you. Look up from your text editor, go talk to people, find out what they're doing, help them succeed.

That's where your focus should be as a junior. (Or as a senior, for that matter.) Helping others succeed. Questioning the status quo is a distraction and not as useful as you think, even if you're right and everyone else is wrong. Maybe especially if you're right.

Stop upvoting this crap, it was submitted YESTERDAY for crying out loud.

Doing the wrong thing (completely ignoring Norma) < doing the right thing for the wrong reason (RMA because of the bad publicity) < doing the right thing for the right reason (RMA because someone at NE screwed up) < doing the right thing in the first place (RMA when it was originally asked for)

Clearly Newegg is in one of the middle categories. Personally, I think as long as customers are taken care of it doesn't so much matter what the decision making behind it is.

I agree that the main point is customer service, not some abstract right thing, but waiting until they scream loud enough is not properly taking care of customers.

But what if that customer HAD to scream loud in order to to get things put right? If the customer rep truly believed that was the policy (whether is was or not) and you keep batting emails back and forth to them... they will not budge. So you have to go above their heads... I don't know the whole/original story but if it was me then I would have kicked up a fuss with Newegg and demanded a telephone call from a manager.

However, it (hopefully) means that everyone at Newegg is now aware of the correct policy and that we will not have this issue again. It also hopefully means that if there are similar issues in the future then clarification is sought before refusing a customer OR it is dealt with by someone more senior.

I don't think a one off incident where they put right should be looked upon so negatively... imagine someone judging humans in the same manner!

I get the impression you turn everything into a political tirade.

What type of diversity are you referring to? Is this really something that factors into a decision about where to live?

I would think saying "I want to live somewhere where everybody is different than me" is almost as bad as saying "I want to live somewhere where everybody is the same as me"

I'm assuming you're in the US, and this is not at all what the ACA does (which is the closest approximation to a US version of NHS).

That author needs to either learn English or blog in his native language. It was downright painful to read.

Easily one of the coolest things I've ever seen.

I believe maratd was referring the present and future, whereas you're linking to things than happened well over a decade ago.

No, I'm not.

The astroturfing against Google has certainly been going on for the past decade. IV/Myhrvold is current. UEFI is current. A number of EU antitrust issues are current. Gaming the office market (no r/w tools available for Android) is current (and Google are now doing a Claytonesque disruptive innovation in that space as they did with Google Docs in the online space).

There's a whole side rant about the ills the Microsoft have spawned in malware, spam, spyware, etc., which despite several decades of protestation on the part of the company's apologist, have simply failed to materialize on other platforms to any vaguely similar fraction of a magnitude. My reasoned analysis is that the security issues are driven by engineering design decisions, and the engineering design decisions are driven by business and marketing objectives, which again are a conquer-at-all-costs, scorched-earth, mentality. My conclusion is that a world in which proprietary control of both operating systems and applications markets is held within a single corporate entity is fundamentally untenable, and that F/OSS si a very strong countervailing force (Apple presents an interesting side case that can also be explored). We've heard again and again "but it's better now", but ... it's not.

I could go on. I can't go on at length with specific references right now, but you've given me inspiration to do so, for which I give you thanks.

The point remains: the company has a fundamental attitude toward competition and exclusive markets. And the boy had cried "wolf" (or rather "but we're different now") far too often a long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

But they haven't changed.

This. 5 years ago it may have been easier, but I don't remember the last time I was even able to connect to a free publicly available wifi signal, whether I did or not.

This is interesting...makes me feel out of touch. I wasn't aware that it was on the decline because the only place I really use it are at the coffeehouse and home. Are there stats on this? What's causing it? Years ago I remember there were many movements for MORE public wifi. What happened?