Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2015 November 7

= November 7 =

Youtube offline for smart mobile phones
Does anybody know how the 'Youtube offline' works on 'smart mobile phones'? Could someone show me how I could use the same method via PC? -- Space Ghost (talk) 03:39, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Presumably it downloads videos and saves them for later viewing. youtube-dl is a popular program to do the same thing. There are others as well. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 06:11, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * You don't even need another program. KeepVid and similar sites just use your browser. In the past, you generally needed to use a Java applet (so did effectively need an a program) but AFAIK this generally isn't needed for YouTube nowadays. Nil Einne (talk) 06:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't want to download guys, I'm on 'pay bit as you go'. Check this out, this will give you an idea of what I'm searching for. I'm in need of this, very very important for my boring life. -- Space Ghost (talk) 21:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Offline viewing works by downloading the videos in advance. If you can't afford to download the videos then you can't watch them offline. You also can't watch them online since that downloads them as you watch. -- BenRG (talk) 02:21, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * How do you think the video gets to your computer (cell phones are computers)? You're always downloading the video from YouTube's servers. This seems to be a common misconception some people have, that "streaming" is somehow completely different from "downloading". The only difference is that a "streaming" video player (like the one on YouTube pages) doesn't save the downloaded data to permanent storage. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 08:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah as BenRG and 71 say whether your streaming or retrieving for offline viewing, both will need to download the file and neither intrisicly save data. Offline viewing would actually often use more data because many people aren't going to watch everything they downloaded for offline viewing. And if you skip through the video to a certain point, it's possible your player won't have downloaded the previous portions if you're streaming (but you would have downloaded the whole thing for offline viewing). Plus a smart offline viewing application will probably choose a resolution close to your device resolution; which the online viewing/streaming also normally tries to do, but the streaming will often reduce quality if your device is having trouble handling it. On the flip side, caching tends to be limited so often if you watch the video again and sometimes even if you rewind a bit, you may end up needing to download from that point again when streaming. And if you're manually downloading, you can probably choose a lower resolution easily. (On the desktop, you can normally also easily choose resolution, but apps seem to be more reluctant to give that level of control.) The cases when offline viewing may save costs (as opposed to data) would be if you download for offline viewing over wifi that you either don't pay for (i.e. free public wifi or similar) or you do pay for but at a lower rate (e.g. a fixed line connection); but when streaming you will need to use more expensive mobile data. Also if you use the same connection as for streaming (be it mobile data or wifi), but the costs depends on time of day (or whatever) and you download for offline viewing when it's cheapest but may not watch streaming content at the cheapest rates. Technically it's possible whoever is providing the offline viewing app could work with the network provider (or are the network provider) to charge downloads for offline viewing at a lower rate (perhaps because the app is designed to be network load aware) but I don't think that's particularly likely. The primary reason for offline viewing in some developing countries is likely because the connection coverage there is more spotty, and also slower even when it exists so streaming is more problematic. (Things like Facebook Zero and Wikipedia Zero and similar initiatives exist, but these tend to be low bandwidth services and also aren't offline oriented. Some providers do offer unlimited Youtube, but this is usually at an additional cost and directed at streaming anyway.) Nil Einne (talk) 17:56, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Its the T.V. adverts, and someone showed me in their smart phone, telling me what I told you guys. I did not believe them at first, I was hopeful because the offline thing works where I'm currently based. That's why I was more exited...
 * Thank you all anyway, for teaching me a bit too guys. Regards. -- Space Ghost (talk) 18:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

IT Graduate Development Programme Job Questions
So, I applied for an "IT Graduate Development Programme" Job with Dell that was forwarded by my college and got this reply:

You will be contacted by a representative from our team for a 15 minute (maximum) phone screening conversation. This conversation will provide you with information about Dell. We will also have 7 general, very basic questions for you.

I would like to reiterate, this is not an interview. This is very much a screening process and a means for you to get some valuable information on Dell.

My question is, does anyone have any idea what types of questions I can expect? Are these likely to be technical or programming questions?

Thanks, 2A02:8084:9360:3780:413C:2B61:770B:88F2 (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * These kind of things are usually a "pre-screen" - they're there to cut out people who an actual interviewer would know weren't going to be right for the job within the first minute of the interview. This kind of thing avoids them wasting their time (interviewing for a position takes a lot of people a bunch of time) and yours (you coming down there for an in-person interview, only to discover they're looking to fill an entirely different job than what you're looking for). Some typical reasons for these kind of misunderstanding and time-wasting scenarios, which the pre-screen is trying to avoid, are:
 * they're actually looking for a senior person, and the bonehead recruiter has sent them a bunch of college graduate resumes.
 * the recruiter (I don't mean to rag too much on technical recruiters, but I've seen some really useless ones) has simply keyword-searched the positions vs candidates - so you get someone who is a graduate in computer science (meaning software and maths) being matched for a job as a computer engineer (meaning designing computer hardware with logic elements or IC packages)
 * some applicant is suffering from some major Dunning-Kruger, and is calling themselves a "C++ expert" because they finished the entry-level Udacity C++ course last week
 * the applicant is obligated to apply for jobs (e.g. to continue to be eligible for government benefits) and is doing so wily-nilly; and the company is obligated to give everyone at least a rudimentary screen (again for some legal reason, like recent layoffs) and say why that specific person isn't suited. I once pre-screened people for a senior Java development position, and one guy had a degree in environmental science (and a bunch of related experience, I think to do with hydrology). Once it was clear that he wasn't experienced with Java, software development, or embedded systems, we had a nice chat about beavers.
 * So you can really only "fail" a pre-screen if somehow wires are crossed somewhere, and it's not a job you'd actually get (or want to get) in an actual interview. -- Finlay McWalterᚠTalk 16:39, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * For those unfamiliar with the term: Dunning–Kruger effect. I would also expand on Finlay's excellent answer a bit: this job might be something you're really not interested in, but thought you might be because companies are sometimes hamstrung by what HR/legal says they can put in the ad. This is a good time to ask one or two pointed questions about what the job really is about - that's what they mean by 'find out about Dell' - you're presumably already aware of the company :-) 99.235.223.170 (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I had a cubicle between two phone-interviewers when I worked for a government contractor. Being government funded, they didn't want to hire Americans. They only wanted programmers from India and China. The interviewers asked them basic questions, such as "what is a pointer?" and "what is a buffer overflow?". They had enough of an idea of the answers to know if the applicant was saying something reasonable. It turned out that at least half of the PhD-level applicants failed the basic phone interview and never made it to the real interview to see how well they could program. I was lucky that I made it through the initial interview, a real interview, and then they flew me to San Diego for the final interview and I was hired. 209.149.114.132 (talk) 12:28, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that at least half of the Indian and Chinese PhD-level applicants who were interviewed over the phone don't know what a pointer or a buffer overflow is? J I P  &#124; Talk 09:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Among other things. They are testing if you can read/write in English. Many cannot. I admit that I wasn't too great with English. I only took what you all call British English for two years in secondary school. But, I like the Beatles and I learned enough English to know all of their songs. You can imagine how hard it was for me to try and figure out what "I am the Walrus" means. After English, there is a problem with the validity of the degree. We joke that everyone in India has a PhD. Even those from India say that. It is because in India, and in China, you can get a PhD just by buying one. You don't learn anything. You just pay for it. So, you need to ask them questions to see if they went to school and got a real PhD or if they just bought one. It is happening in the United States now. There are many online universities that will give you a degree and you don't have to do any work. You just pay for the classes. They have a test for each class, but the answers are freely available online, so you easily pass all the tests without learning anything. Then, you get a degree. Soon, they will abandon all the middle work and let you just pay for the whole package and then give you the degree. So, it is still important to ask questions and see if they know the material. I think it is important to note that my experience is in computer science. So, when I state that half of the applicants either didn't know English or didn't know their degree, it is only in that field and only for those applying to work as a government contract programmer in the United States. I am not making the claim that half of the PhD holders in all of India don't have a real degree. I prefer the Chinese programmers, but I'm obviously biased. 209.149.114.132 (talk) 13:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * "Soon, they will abandon all the middle work and let you just pay for the whole package and then give you the degree." - sadly, this has already happened...and for at least the last 8 years. "Life experience degrees" require you to fill out a form describing your "life experience" and rate whether they think you have already demonstrated that you've qualified for their degree. Then you have a cat who earned a life-experience degree...which strongly suggests that this "rating" process is a rubber-stamp machine.  Truly - when someone claims to have a degree - the only question is "Which college?" - and even then, you have to be VERY careful of cleverly chosen names for fake degree mills that are designed to fool you into thinking that they are a part of a 'real' collage.  SteveBaker (talk) 19:25, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


 * It is very variable between companies - I've applied for jobs with six figure salaries and been asked "What is the biggest number you can store in a byte" and stupid stuff like that on the phone screen. On the other hand, I've also worked places where there is no script for the interviewer at all and you just chat about whatever (s)he fancies talking about.  But as others have said - you shouldn't stress about it.  If this is a job that you come within a million miles of getting, you won't fail the initial phone screen - it's there to get rid of people who have absolutely no clue and who should never have applied for the job in the first place.  Subsquent interviews (which might also be on the phone or via Skype) will likely be the harder ones - expect at least one face-to-face interview after that.  But the whole process is incredibly variable.  My previous job needed one phone call and a 30 minute interview (at which they actually offered me the job, haggled over salaries and settled it all on a handshake) - but then my current job took five separate, hour long phone calls, then a gruelling 8 hour back-to-back set of 30 minute grillings by different team members...ending with a quiet stroll to the local Starbucks with my future boss...and then a nerve-wracking four week wait for an actual job offer! SteveBaker (talk) 22:01, 9 November 2015 (UTC)