The burden is absolutely on so-called "stable" coin issuers, exchanges, and other parties trying to sell crypto assets to prove that they are somehow the exceptional case of responsible grownups working within the ecosystem...b/c the "success stories" of circa 2019 are turning out to just be the folks who had the biggest scams running, and no one seems to be able to explain what's actually changed since then. (Hint: nothing! Nothing has changed, except that some of the rubes are becoming aware that they're the suckers left holding the bag, which makes actual cash somewhat thinner on the ground.)
Yes, sure, many of the exchanges are still running and money is moving around, so _someone_ is making a profit. But every time another domino falls the stans immediately challenge everyone to prove that _this particular_ actor is somehow insolvent, since obviously the rest of the ecosystem is sound...and in fact, the future of finance! Really!
It all stinks, just like it did a year ago, and five years before that.
To your numbers: they're made up, based on "value" of other crypto assets being shifted around, with no accounting standards, audits, or regulatory scrutiny to validate or back them.
I spent ~3 years at Twitter (2010-2013) as an engineer and manager. Made a competitive salary while there. Left with almost $2m in equity (ISOs + RSUs).
I sold the bulk of my position quickly due to serious concerns about tying the bulk of my net worth to a single company's future.
After strike price, AMT, and income tax I ended up with roughly $1m in cash. Probably could have been closer to $1.2m if I knew what I was doing tax-wise.
Not a reproducible pattern to be sure, but it was a nice outcome.
Rich people can be alcoholics, too – and in fact they can often conceal and maintain it better. A well-off white collar worker is unlikely to spend a significant percentage of their income on alcohol, even if they're drinking to excess; they also are likely to have flexible work hours, sick time, and other mechanisms to cover for their binges and hangovers.
There are even (up to a point) social and professional benefits that come from drinking with colleagues. Alcohol is a huge part of many companies' culture, and people can easily hit the 80th percentile (>15 drinks per week) simply by accepting a reasonable fraction of the offers to share a drink with their peers in a given work week.
Some normal signs in tech companies:
* Company-stocked beer fridges
* Hosted weekly (or more often) happy hours
* Personal bottles of expensive whiskey on desks
* Expense reports for "team dinners" that are 60-70% booze
Disclaimer: I'm posting this under a new dummy account because I don't want this to be seen as feedback from my company. We didn't interview you, but I'm a senior manager and I want to help w/o implicitly dragging my team into it. (The key word is also "help"; I'm not trying to belittle you, just give my honest assessment of this project, quick as it was to create.)
tl;dr: I agree with the assessment that this doesn't look like the kind of code I'd expect of a senior developer.
The biggest issue from my POV is that you pull in a _lot_ of heavy-weight frameworks and implicit dependencies for what could be a really simple app. To actually examine the application logic of your submission, I have to flip through dozens of auto-generated PHP files, Javascript module wrappers, and empty directories.
Sometimes, calling yourself a "senior" engineer means doing less, not more. The layers of indirection, framework code, and build toolchain applied here make it harder to follow what your code is actually doing. Coupled with a lack of unit tests, it seems impossible to verify in any short amount of time that it actually works as promised.
Even with all that MVC goodness, the separation of concerns on the client isn't great. There's a mix of display logic and app state visible in lots of places. (IMHO game.js is the worst offender here, as the entire game state and DOM rendering are mixed pretty indiscriminately.)
Finally, asking a reviewer to run a bunch of code from an untrusted repo via 'sudo' is pretty much a giant red flag for me. A simple JS+PHP webapp shouldn't require me to do anything as root on my machine. (I'm also not familiar with Composer, but my brief skimming of the homepage, it seems like the whole point is to not require system-wide installation of dependencies, so the sudo bit is especially weird.)
It looks functional, and if you were interviewing specifically at a shop that used these frameworks and tools, it might not be so bad. If asked to review this without that context, though, I would give similar feedback to what you received.
The burden is absolutely on so-called "stable" coin issuers, exchanges, and other parties trying to sell crypto assets to prove that they are somehow the exceptional case of responsible grownups working within the ecosystem...b/c the "success stories" of circa 2019 are turning out to just be the folks who had the biggest scams running, and no one seems to be able to explain what's actually changed since then. (Hint: nothing! Nothing has changed, except that some of the rubes are becoming aware that they're the suckers left holding the bag, which makes actual cash somewhat thinner on the ground.)
Yes, sure, many of the exchanges are still running and money is moving around, so _someone_ is making a profit. But every time another domino falls the stans immediately challenge everyone to prove that _this particular_ actor is somehow insolvent, since obviously the rest of the ecosystem is sound...and in fact, the future of finance! Really!
It all stinks, just like it did a year ago, and five years before that.
To your numbers: they're made up, based on "value" of other crypto assets being shifted around, with no accounting standards, audits, or regulatory scrutiny to validate or back them.