The problem at Goodreads is not that they haven't made any improvements over the past decade that Amazon bought it. The problem is that they've only made technical improvements and other changes under the hood that no user ever notices. They weren't able to drive a strong product vision forward under Amazon because of poor product vision and poor organizational incentives. It should be a cautionary tale to the people who always complain about not working enough on tech debt - too much of that can be fatal too.
Amazon bought Goodreads in 2013 - if you had interviewed after the acquisition, you'd have encountered Amazon's style of interviews, which is much more professional and better than the experience you describe.
How is this computed? It looks cool, but it's difficult to use as a book discovery tool unless you know more about why it considers one book related to another.
This feels like a missed opportunity. There's a lot of data Shippo could share about USPS and that would help add more context to what's happening in the news. But it's difficult to understand anything concrete from this. It would be more helpful to see how this fits into long term trends and other context on how abnormal it is.
Wow! Q3F! That was my absolute favorite game back in the day, and I was always sad how it fell off. I couldn't get a game loaded here yet, but looking forward to it.
On the applicant side, one of the more interesting questions I've been asked (as a product manager) was something to the effect of:
"What is something you believe about product management that differs from conventional wisdom (or what the majority of other product managers believe?)"
I thought it was a good question, because it gives the chance for the candidate to talk about how they think, and it gives them a license to speak a little more honestly than they ordinarily would say in a normal interview. It shows you how much thought the person has given to their profession and how they approach their job.
If you were asking this during hiring, I think it should be done with care on your end, because I could see it easily being misinterpreted by the wrong team/interviewer.
For example, if someone came in and said something like "Compared to others, I think A/B testing is a waste of time", it would behoove you to dive in a little bit more to understand why they think that. It shouldn't be disqualifying if you're a team that does a lot of A/B testing.
Location: San Francisco, CA
Remote: No
Willing to relocate: Yes (though preference for SF)
Technologies: R, SQL, Javascript, D3.js, Python, iOS/Android, Jira, Web Analytics
Résumé/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5aigPCvgtxAbWpyT0hNc19jMTQ/view?usp=sharing
Email: nguyen.jnn@gmail.com
Product Manager with a background in analytics, user-centric, and a deep care for design. Have managed mobile products with millions of dollars of revenue and MAU of hundreds of thousands. Looking for consumer-oriented companies or otherwise doing work in interesting industries. Feel free to send me an email.
I have heavily acknowledged their work in tweets, on fb, on github, and in the about page. I have also thanked them directly. Also happy to note that most articles about the site also acknowledge the influence from hint.fm.
With their tools for meteorologists you can layer up all the data layers from the GRIB, radar, observations, pollen etc. as well as the forecast data to 'see' and explore the weather in quite astounding ways. Think of what you have here but in lots more resolution with untold extra layers of data - it is a fun way to understand the world that we should all be seeing and doing by now instead of just getting a screenful of dumb icons.
It seems that the likes of WSI are quite happy to serve the market for dumb icons rather than make their deluxe weather tools available to all on an app. Imagine if everyone could be an amateur forecaster and submit useful observation data from their phone to get fed back into the 'model'.
The meteorologists are keeping the best tools from us thinking we would not be interested, your site encourages me to think otherwise.
The NCEP data provides only 1º resolution, so bilinear interpolation is used to fill in the gaps. How much interpolation is needed depends on the zoom level and the projection. On top of that, the distortion caused by the projection must be applied to the interpolated wind field. All of these heavy calculations are done up front so the animation can be as fast as possible. So each time the orientation of the globe changes, we have to redo the calculations.
"On top of that, the distortion caused by the projection must be applied to the interpolated wind field."
I think I'm missing something. Are you overlaying a drawing canvas over the globe and handling your own custom projection then? Is it not possible to dynamically draw to a webgl texture and let the gpu take care of projection?
I do understand why you'd have to restart on zoom. Overall its an excellent project you have here.
Exactly! The globe is SVG and the animation is a Canvas layered on top. However, I'm still using D3's projection logic to calculate the distortion. Yeah, could save on redoing the distortion calc if just globe rotation changes, but would still need to redo the grid interpolation. So, to keep it easy I just rerun the whole deal.
WebGL would be fun to learn, but AFAIK not supported by mobile browsers yet.
WebGL is at the least supported by the default browser on the Galaxy S II, and presumably newer models. It doesn't support floating point textures, however.
This makes more sense in light of the view supporting zoom, which didn't occur to me the first time I visited the page. Perhaps add a note in the corner?
