用TortoiseSVN連svn，每一個動作都會重覆的詢問密碼，
解決的方法就是在settings>network>ssh client中，
輸入下面敘述：
C:\Program Files\TortoiseSVN\bin\TortoisePlink.exe -pw svnuser_passwd
2010/02/15
2010/02/10
我的應屆面試體驗
| 公司 | A | B | C |
| 地點 | 北縣工業區 | 北市商業區 | 北縣商業區 |
| 部門 | arc | olg | core |
| 職務 | game programmer | game programmer | game programmer |
| 薪水 | (n - 6)k * 14 + bonus (底薪是按公司規定， 三個月後根據績效調整) | 不詳 | (n + 3)k * 14 + bonus (底薪由主管核薪， 三個月後根據績效調整) |
| 福利 | 有小暑假7天 旅遊補助 | 不詳 | 旅遊補助 |
| 工時 | 不詳 | 不詳 | 不詳 |
| 加班制度 | 平日 以1.5倍時薪計算 假日 以 2 倍時薪計算 | 責任制 (感覺加班是常態) | 責任制 (聽說這部門不常加班) |
| 技術 | AS3 + JSP + 心理學research | C++ | C++ 及 技術research |
| 工作內容 | 目前開發博奕game， project正在籌畫階段。 project完成後，team會接新的project。 | 開發olg | 公司的核心研發部門。 開發framework, middleware,tools等核心技術來support 其它的遊戲部門。 |
| 面試時間 | 1/26 1st 面試 1/27 下午發offer | 1/27 1st 面試 2/3 2nd 面試通知，我婉拒 | 1/28 1st 面試 2/3 2nd 面試 2/5 電話口頭offer, 問意願 2/8 我婉拒 |
| 面試感覺 | 人資效率超高(履歷投完不到24hr，便接到面試通知； 面試完隔天便收到offer)、面試當天不小心提早一個小時到，但人資馬上便安排筆試及面試，完全無delay、面試官很和藹可親，對我的論文頗感興趣、面試結束時，面試官跟我要了一本論文草稿。 | 面試官問了 virtual function, call back function、暗示工作可能很常加班。 | 我面試提早半小時到，結果等了半小時才有人資來找我、部門主管很nice，有年輕教授的fu、部門主管對我的論文及過去的project很感興趣，並問了些深度且有趣的問題，相談甚歡、部門主管說我肯定會有2nd 面試機會、面試結束時，部門主管詢問我的advisor大名。 |
| 筆試 | 計概、邏輯測驗、數列測驗 | 無 | C++、人格測驗、英文測驗 |
| 優點 | 公司佳評如潮、公司過去獲利穩定、表現極優、發長潛力大、公司制度佳、公司員工向心力高、我一直很想大玩AS3、心理學research亦是我的興趣、team小而美，可以跟美術、企劃互動、可以從頭至尾參與project的開發、有加班費制度、紅利不考量年資、有小暑假、team的研發人員皆碩士以上、親朋好友+ 鄉民都推這間、面試官幫我爭取名校條款，且面試隔天便發offer，深感被重視、team leader感覺很好相處，部門主管聽說相當棒！ | 技術力強、開發online game、公司在台北市區 | 公司規模大，名聲響、公司在台北縣熱鬧商業區、公司男女比例感覺很優、公司環境裝潢很有設計感、此部門是公司的核心團隊、此部門很少加班、此部門有30個研發人員，皆碩博士以上、此部門因為開發核心技術，採用agile programming，很要求coding 品質，也需要技術research能力，或許可以學到開發api的經驗、我一直很想嘗試用C++開發大型project、公司開給我這新鮮人的底薪，在台灣遊戲界算非常高，已經跟電子大廠不分上下，深感被重視、此部門主管感覺起來相當有修養且學術底子優。 |
| 缺點 | 公司在荒涼的工業區、底薪偏低、公司環境沒有裝潢。 | 公司自製遊戲經驗相對較不足、不知為何公司外界評價不佳、該部門僅成立一年，詢問不到內部實際運作狀況。 |
我1/21碩論口試，碩論初稿在1/18寄出後，便馬上打開104 開始投履歷。
因為1/31學校宿舍就不能住了，所以希望能快點決定工作及工作的居所。
做遊戲是一直的夢想，所以履歷只投遊戲公司，約投了七、八間。
一共得到三間公司(A, B and C) 的面試機會。
1/26
A 公司面試。
面試當天便肯定我的技術能力，並希望我能立即加入他們的團隊一起打拼。
面試當天便肯定我的技術能力，並希望我能立即加入他們的團隊一起打拼。
面試官很用心的幫我"分析"其它公司的優缺點,
面試官主動說要幫我問公司，是否可將我的學校加入名校條款。
面試官主動說要幫我問公司，是否可將我的學校加入名校條款。
面試官對我的論文很感興趣，面試結束時，希望我那本面試用的論文初稿能送給他。
1/27
B公司面試。
與B公司人資面試時，接到A公司面試官打來的電話，告知我的學校已加入他們公司的名校條款。
與B公司人資面試時，接到A公司面試官打來的電話，告知我的學校已加入他們公司的名校條款。
與B公司面試完，回到學校，便接到A公司人資打來的電話，
詢問過我的意願，便立即發offer給我(e-mail附件)。
詢問過我的意願，便立即發offer給我(e-mail附件)。
1/28
C公司面試。
部門主管對我的論文及過去的project很感興趣。
部門主管說我肯定有2nd面試積會。
部門主管問我的advisor尊姓大名。
部門主管對我的論文及過去的project很感興趣。
部門主管說我肯定有2nd面試積會。
部門主管問我的advisor尊姓大名。
接著我在1/31遷出宿舍, 在台北沒地方住，
打算2/1 ~ 2/2跟家人在淡水玩個兩天，然後2/3找完工作居所，便一起回高雄老家。
2/1
晚上逛淡水老街時，接到C公司 2nd面試的邀請，因為我的時間很緊，就約在2/3早上。
(此時心中已經90%決定要去A公司了，也已經物色好一些三重的房子了，
但想說去跟高階主管聊聊天，累積一些面試經驗也不錯。)
(此時心中已經90%決定要去A公司了，也已經物色好一些三重的房子了，
但想說去跟高階主管聊聊天，累積一些面試經驗也不錯。)
2/3
早上去C公司參加2nd面試，
還在等待人資安排的時候，B公司的人資打來約2nd面試。
因為我時間實在太緊，就說我決定要去A公司，婉拒了B公司的2nd面試機會。
跟C公司研發長面試時，我還是present我的論文，但是面試時間蠻短的。
接著就跟人資聊，跟人資聊天很開心。
不過人資說公司給的薪資會跟我的期望薪資有落差。
(雖然我知道台灣遊戲業給的不高，但想到同學及學長在電子產業的平均行情，
自尊心做崇，所以期望薪資就寫了42k ~ 50k)
2/4
因為決定要去A公司了, 所以殺到三重看了一整天房子,
然後找到一間好屋， 不過月租要8,000 大洋啊!
但房子的各項條件都好，我的時間又太緊，
就趕緊付了兩個月押金並簽約
然後當晚就回高雄了..
2/5
晚上六點，接到C公司人資的電話，
她說面試我的主管很希望我能加入他們的團隊。
她說面試我的主管很希望我能加入他們的團隊。
還說他們公司除了加班費部分外，其它的福利都不輸A公司。
(還偷偷跟我說A公司雖然有加班費, 但其實不像我想像那樣那麼不常加班..XD)
至於底薪，她說他們主管還要討論， 需3-5天才能核薪。)
掛掉電話不到十分鐘，C公司的人資又打電話來了。
她說主管剛已決定要給我4x k 了，這個底薪真的超乎我的意外。
人資問我是否可以告訴她我的決定，我說要下星期一才能回覆。
我真的很心動，因為這個價格對遊戲界的新人來說非常高，
整整比A公司的底薪高了9k ，差了一個房租囉~
於是當晚趕緊跑到網咖，po版甄詢ptt鄉民的意見。
結果po完沒多久，馬上收到兩位A公司工程師丟過來的水球，
他們都說A公司的待遇及工作氣氛很好，選擇A公司不會後悔。
2/6
下午家裡網路裝好，趕緊上ptt看鄉民們的意見。
結果大部分的鄉民都推A公司，不知為何他們對C公司這麼反感。
另外也收到幾封站內信，其中兩封是另外兩個A公司工程師寄來的站內信，
信中都是他們對A公司的正面評價。
2/8
經甄詢家人死黨以及ptt鄉民的意見，
經甄詢家人死黨以及ptt鄉民的意見，
推A公司的人數整個大勝C公司，真是有夠莫名其妙。
明明C公司底薪多給了我9K耶!!!
不過在百般掙扎後，還是寫了e-mail給C公司的人資，
說明了自己的最終決定。
呼~ 說起來也頗幸運，
從1/21口試完，兩個禮拜內，
一鼓作氣地搬遷宿舍、陪家人玩、找到工作，找到房子。
這都要感謝家人的幫忙與上天的祝福啊。
這都要感謝家人的幫忙與上天的祝福啊。
不過也因此，有些原訂的計劃得擇日再執行了。
(ex. 考汽車駕照及腳踏車環島)
此外，過年也不得閒，除了要幫忙家人除舊佈新外，還要寫投稿的paper，
以及k一些programming和algorithm的書，以備年後工作之需。
2010/01/26
2010/01/25
Wordpress 轉Blogspot
由於剛交接server時，還是專題生，
那時候的專題生在實驗室都沒自己的電腦。
所以就在某台server上練習linux，
後來也把blog架在上面。
不過最近快要離開學校了，
該搬的東西都得搬一搬，
就在想要把這個blog搬到哪去，
第一個念頭是乾脆轉到blogspot去，這樣後端不用自己管理，也蠻方便的。
於是找到下面這個網站，
http://wordpress2blogger.appspot.com/
只要先把wordpress從dashboard export出來成xml檔，
再把export的xml檔上傳至上面那個網站，
它會自動幫轉成blogspot格式的xml檔，並下載至本地端。
接著再把blogspot格式的xml檔import至blogspot就大功告成了。
不用花到五分鐘。
大部分的資料都轉的還不錯，
post, comment, tag，category轉過去都大致正確。
只是tag跟category會結合成一類。
private的文章會變成publish。
比較麻煩的是，很多post排版都亂了。
我有四百多篇post，整理起來會起笑~
那時候的專題生在實驗室都沒自己的電腦。
所以就在某台server上練習linux，
後來也把blog架在上面。
不過最近快要離開學校了，
該搬的東西都得搬一搬，
就在想要把這個blog搬到哪去，
第一個念頭是乾脆轉到blogspot去，這樣後端不用自己管理，也蠻方便的。
於是找到下面這個網站，
http://wordpress2blogger.appspot.com/
只要先把wordpress從dashboard export出來成xml檔，
再把export的xml檔上傳至上面那個網站，
它會自動幫轉成blogspot格式的xml檔，並下載至本地端。
接著再把blogspot格式的xml檔import至blogspot就大功告成了。
不用花到五分鐘。
大部分的資料都轉的還不錯，
post, comment, tag，category轉過去都大致正確。
只是tag跟category會結合成一類。
private的文章會變成publish。
比較麻煩的是，很多post排版都亂了。
我有四百多篇post，整理起來會起笑~
2010/01/23
Book Review: The Social Atom
As we know, social problem is intricate so that in most circumstances we cannot accurately predict what will happen in human society if something changes or goes wrong. Many sociologists thought that we cannot unravel the mystery of social phenomena by the same way of explaining the physical world, because there is a great difference between people and a physical atom. In comparison with a physical atom, individual person has his/her own unique and elaborate personality, background, and experiences. Thus, it is difficult to understand how individual makes a decision in various situations, let alone to predict the collective behaviors in daily life of human beings. Nevertheless, the book The Social Atom seeks to persuade us that the social phenomena may not be as complicated as we thought before, if we study the pattern of self-organization as physics but not individual complexity. The author, Mark Buchanan, of this book is a physicist and science writer, and he was formerly the editor of Nature which is a scientifically acclaimed international journal of science. However, the book The Social Atom is sort of a popular science book, which is written in an easy to read non-academic style and assumes no prior knowledge of either physics or social science.
In the beginning of the book, Buchanan said that when people think about physics, they think about quantum theory, Newton’s three laws of motion, Albert Einstein and his theory of relativity, black holes and so on. However, physics has moved a way beyond that. Modern physics has also branched out into another topic of interest. Not only did physicists concern with the fundamental equations, but they were keen to know how organization can emerge by itself. For example, they studied why the same water molecules can turn to solid when they are put into the freezer, and why they can change into vapor when boiled. Another question physicist was inquisitive to understand is why the same carbon atoms make up both diamond and graphite. In short, the answer of above questions is that a new and totally different material can emerge just by putting the same atoms together in a different pattern. In other words, the vital key for us to understand is the pattern of self-organization but not atoms themselves. From the same point of view, Buchanan claims that social science is like physics, pattern matters more than individual. And the complex social outcomes can result from potentially simple rules of individual behavior. That means we can explain and even predict a wide variety of human behaviors by using the observations akin to physics. What is more, he creates a new term called “Social Physics” for this approach.
Buchanan then gives far-reaching examples to show that regardless of people thinking of ourselves as self-determined individuals making up their own mind, they usually behave instinctively and act strongly rely on others around us. One of interesting example is that when you observe carefully the crowd on the street, either those who are shopping or just flooding out of a stadium after a big baseball game, you may find some intangible structure of the crowd. In the first place, everyone goes in different directions so that the crowd movements look like somewhat chaotic. In the meantime, some people begin to follow another in an effort to avoid collisions, and they gradually form narrow streams of movement. In the streams everyone moves in the same direction and flows along with one another. Furthermore, as more people join such streams, there is a greater pull on others to join the flow. This kind of herding behavior is not intended or planned by anyone, but the emerging pattern, the pedestrian stream, is somehow improvisatory and self-organizing. The motivation of the individual is simple, following with others in order to readily avoid colliding with the rest of the crowd, but the outcome is a complex collective behavior pattern. The idea is that we human being, just as social atoms, work by simple rules in the most daily life situations. If we learn more similar patterns in our social life at different levels, we will be able to anticipate social phenomena accurately.
Another compelling example given by Buchanan in the book is the well-known neighborhood segregation model in social science. In the US, spatial separation of the races is a long-standing phenomenon; white people and black people are often living in different communities. Most people think intuitively the cause is racism. But Thomas Schelling, awarded the 2005 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, showed us racial segregation could be just another collective pattern similar with the streams in a crowd but not related to racism. In 1971, Schelling designed a board game with dimes and pennies which stand for two races of people. At first he premises that no one is racist, but they are reasonably tolerant of diversity and only move when they find themselves in a clear minority group within their neighborhood. More specifically, they follow a rule like “If fewer than 30% of my neighbors belong to my race, then I will move.” The simulation game starts with a well-integrated community, and two races of people are mixed together randomly. In each run, every individual checks their surrounding and decides to move or stay by using the simple rule. After a short time, every individual stops moving and keeps a stable status. They surprisingly end up dividing themselves into sharply segregated group livings, even though the outcome is not intended by any individual. It is very counterintuitive and the link between individual attitudes and collective outcome is not straightforward. Buchanan said: “This is the power of pattern over people, and you can easily get an outcome that absolutely no one desires or intended… Next time you see racial segregation you can’t conclude that is racial discrimination.”
The work of Schelling unveils the fact that micro-motives lead to surprising macro-behavior, and enlighten many scientific fields. Recently, several physicists, computer scientists and social scientists have used computer simulation models to study patterns by regarding people as social atoms and endowing them with simple rules to interact with each other. The works include simulating human trails, traffic jams, panic behavior of pedestrians, riot situations, market crushes and bubbles, and social epidemics. They show that the thought with respect to our human society has been changing. Human behavior could be often simpler than what we think; to understand the human world better, we need to think of patterns, not just people. At any rate, if you would like to understand this new trend in social science, the book The Social Atom is definitely the best book for your reference.
In the beginning of the book, Buchanan said that when people think about physics, they think about quantum theory, Newton’s three laws of motion, Albert Einstein and his theory of relativity, black holes and so on. However, physics has moved a way beyond that. Modern physics has also branched out into another topic of interest. Not only did physicists concern with the fundamental equations, but they were keen to know how organization can emerge by itself. For example, they studied why the same water molecules can turn to solid when they are put into the freezer, and why they can change into vapor when boiled. Another question physicist was inquisitive to understand is why the same carbon atoms make up both diamond and graphite. In short, the answer of above questions is that a new and totally different material can emerge just by putting the same atoms together in a different pattern. In other words, the vital key for us to understand is the pattern of self-organization but not atoms themselves. From the same point of view, Buchanan claims that social science is like physics, pattern matters more than individual. And the complex social outcomes can result from potentially simple rules of individual behavior. That means we can explain and even predict a wide variety of human behaviors by using the observations akin to physics. What is more, he creates a new term called “Social Physics” for this approach.
Buchanan then gives far-reaching examples to show that regardless of people thinking of ourselves as self-determined individuals making up their own mind, they usually behave instinctively and act strongly rely on others around us. One of interesting example is that when you observe carefully the crowd on the street, either those who are shopping or just flooding out of a stadium after a big baseball game, you may find some intangible structure of the crowd. In the first place, everyone goes in different directions so that the crowd movements look like somewhat chaotic. In the meantime, some people begin to follow another in an effort to avoid collisions, and they gradually form narrow streams of movement. In the streams everyone moves in the same direction and flows along with one another. Furthermore, as more people join such streams, there is a greater pull on others to join the flow. This kind of herding behavior is not intended or planned by anyone, but the emerging pattern, the pedestrian stream, is somehow improvisatory and self-organizing. The motivation of the individual is simple, following with others in order to readily avoid colliding with the rest of the crowd, but the outcome is a complex collective behavior pattern. The idea is that we human being, just as social atoms, work by simple rules in the most daily life situations. If we learn more similar patterns in our social life at different levels, we will be able to anticipate social phenomena accurately.
Another compelling example given by Buchanan in the book is the well-known neighborhood segregation model in social science. In the US, spatial separation of the races is a long-standing phenomenon; white people and black people are often living in different communities. Most people think intuitively the cause is racism. But Thomas Schelling, awarded the 2005 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, showed us racial segregation could be just another collective pattern similar with the streams in a crowd but not related to racism. In 1971, Schelling designed a board game with dimes and pennies which stand for two races of people. At first he premises that no one is racist, but they are reasonably tolerant of diversity and only move when they find themselves in a clear minority group within their neighborhood. More specifically, they follow a rule like “If fewer than 30% of my neighbors belong to my race, then I will move.” The simulation game starts with a well-integrated community, and two races of people are mixed together randomly. In each run, every individual checks their surrounding and decides to move or stay by using the simple rule. After a short time, every individual stops moving and keeps a stable status. They surprisingly end up dividing themselves into sharply segregated group livings, even though the outcome is not intended by any individual. It is very counterintuitive and the link between individual attitudes and collective outcome is not straightforward. Buchanan said: “This is the power of pattern over people, and you can easily get an outcome that absolutely no one desires or intended… Next time you see racial segregation you can’t conclude that is racial discrimination.”
The work of Schelling unveils the fact that micro-motives lead to surprising macro-behavior, and enlighten many scientific fields. Recently, several physicists, computer scientists and social scientists have used computer simulation models to study patterns by regarding people as social atoms and endowing them with simple rules to interact with each other. The works include simulating human trails, traffic jams, panic behavior of pedestrians, riot situations, market crushes and bubbles, and social epidemics. They show that the thought with respect to our human society has been changing. Human behavior could be often simpler than what we think; to understand the human world better, we need to think of patterns, not just people. At any rate, if you would like to understand this new trend in social science, the book The Social Atom is definitely the best book for your reference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)