Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs • Hacker News Board

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#341

Post by sulam » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 9:56 AM UTC

jorblumesea wrote: post #158

How does flooding the market with developers that will never be able to pass their interviews help them? I guess it will increase the amount of people in the 1% by expanding the size of that pool? Just seems like Google out of all companies has a need for the best, not just blue collar code slingers. Many people with 4 years CS degrees from good schools do not get hired.

A couple misconceptions seemed buried in here. First of all, plenty of Google engineers are doing “boring” work that can be done by coding school grads. Secondly, Google declines qualified candidates roughly 50% of the time according to people who work there. The hiring process is far more random than we’d like to imagine it is when you have a “high bar”.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#342

Post by speedplane » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 10:02 AM UTC

FLGMwt wrote: post #257

hobofan wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the want to free up "good" developers that work jobs requiring a lower skill level, by providing a better fitting low skill person for the job? (Not to be taken too seriously)

I'll take you seriously. $1bn is a lot of money when put towards education and Google can make 5+ year investments when it comes to tech talent.

It's a nice sum of money, but education is extremely expensive, it's probably less than you think. It's enough to pay roughly, for 7000 to go to college, or maybe 50,000 people to take a one semester programming bootcamp.

A great start, but it's not exactly transformational.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#343

Post by speedplane » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 10:04 AM UTC

dna_polymerase wrote: post #71

Yeah, more bootcamp trained JS-"artisans" and Ruby-"artists" for all of us! If they wanted to do good, invest in the school system, use your power to monitor Betsy DeVos and call her out for the bullshit to come from her. If Google could raise interest in STEM in High Schools already that would be way more organic.

Don't think there is anything wrong or ignoble teaching people JS. It's an excellent start.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#344

Post by baursak » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 10:56 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #306

baursak wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't the original commenter, but I don't think when they said "owner class" they meant passive minority shareholders with $200K portfolios or people with some money in their 401Ks. While some of the richest are certainly entrepreneurs, the largest percentage of Forbes 400 are people who got there with OPM, other people's money, like hedge fund managers. Another chunk are heirs like Waltons or Kochs. Did Waltons g…

Check this on Sam Walton before assuming he got something for nothing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Walton More accurately he made something from nothing. You and anyone else could have made a little something, too, if you'd bought Walmart stock. Lots of people did. Also, you could be a millionaire by retirement if you adhered to a regular investment program rather than only one investment of $1,000.

Sam Walton is dead, I'm not talking about him. I'm talking about his children, they're in top 20 richest people or something like that. Each one.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#345

Post by thebarknight » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 11:28 AM UTC

afpx wrote: post #268

Google spends what, upwards of $10B a year on software engineer salary and benefits? So, seems like a good deal. If they can spend $1B and decrease salary’s and benefits by at least 10% over a few years, they get return on investment.

This was exactly my thought as well

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#346

Post by crdoconnor » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 12:39 PM UTC

nova22033 wrote: post #221

crdoconnor wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There are a LOT of people in tech who are really insecure about their own jobs. If the rest of the job market looked like it did in the 1950s, sure - no problem. I don't see any reason to feel particularly secure when this is what's going on outside of tech though: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/28/adjunct-prof... >They see any move like this as a plot by bigcorp to undermine their job prospects. Eithe…

What does the plight of adjunct professors have to do with the job market for software professionals? >I wonder sometimes if people are really naive enough to think that Mark Zuckerberg is trying to "reform immigration" or "get CS taught in primary schools" out of the goodness of his heart. First a non sequitur and now a strawman? I don't think Zuckeberg lets me use facebook out of the goodness of his heart either...

>What does the plight of adjunct professors have to do with the job market for software professionals?

I see tens of thousands of (often desperate) people trying to get in to the profession because that's what it's like on the outside.

So far demand has outstripped supply, but I can see demand collapsing if/when VC dries up and demand remaining the same while people continue to flood in to the profession.

That is, over time, I expect the job market for software professionals to end up more like the job market for adjunct professors than vice versa.

>First a non sequitur and now a strawman? I don't think Zuckeberg lets me use facebook out of the goodness of his heart either...

Right. So you think Facebook is run for advertising dollars and his other "charitable" ventures (e.g. to reform immigration) are run as an attempt to undermine developer wages?

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#347

Post by ralmidani » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 12:58 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #297

ralmidani wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is a cliche, but universities (are supposed to) teach you critical thinking as well as social and life skills, not just train you for a specific vocation. Watering down university education is not necessary. If someone wants to focus just on tech skills, they can go to a boot camp. Expanding boot camps so they become multi-year experiences may be a good idea, but they should not be called universities.

> ...universities (are supposed to) teach you critical thinking as well as social and life skills... I disagree. I think they provide services to customers. Customers decide what the services are for. I suppose some students are very interested in laying a foundation in the liberal arts. Most, in my experience, are more worried about getting their careers started out on the right foot (especially considering all the…

There's nothing preventing you from naming your institution a "university", but if you want accreditation, there are already certain criteria you have to meet.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#348

Post by thatonechad » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 2:07 PM UTC

forapurpose wrote: post #288

thatonechad wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously? So how does everyone else that go to technical trade school or don't go to college at all learn about the real world? Are you seriously trying to say that college teaches you about the real world. Thanks for the laugh.

Yes, education teaches you things, important things, that likely you will not know otherwise. For example, I studied Chinese history and culture with some of the world's leading experts; I'm confident that I know much more about it than people who spent the same time learning Java. And because I know those things, I have a much better understanding of everything I read about China and also about my own country's hist…

I'm sorry but reason isnt taught in college its taught with experience. I know many people who have reason, empathy, and everything else without having to be taught. It's part of your upbringing not taught in college.

I believe most people would benefit from learning the skills they need for a job rather than learning about China because rarely will a tech job require your vast knowledge of Chinese history. They want to know whether or not you can push code that the business needs.

I understand your point and I am not saying that these classes are useless. But at the end of the day colleges are there to produce for jobs and my point being is that if you had more time on tech related classes than classes you don't need then you would most certainly be more ready for a job.

When I went to college there were so many classes I really didnt need. Regardless of if they were "good" for me it was a waste of my time because I didn't care nor need that information. I took classes in sociology, macro and micro economics, accounting 1 and accounting 2 and so on and so on.

Did these classes help me in some way? Yes I would say so but what if I took an extra 5 classes honing skills related to the job I was going to seek after college. Can you really sit here and say that those 5 classes are better off? I don't think so.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#349

Post by thatonechad » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 2:10 PM UTC

ralmidani wrote: post #281

thatonechad wrote: post #68

Universities need to start focusing on skills instead of general education. Imagine the amount of skills you could learn if you didn't have to take 60 hours of nonsense credits and focus on skills you require. Programming / Networking / Hardware need a new type of University that is similar to Trade colleges but focus primarily on the skills and nothing more. The first 1-2 years could focus on the foundations while t…

I know this is a cliche, but universities (are supposed to) teach you critical thinking as well as social and life skills, not just train you for a specific vocation. Watering down university education is not necessary. If someone wants to focus just on tech skills, they can go to a boot camp. Expanding boot camps so they become multi-year experiences may be a good idea, but they should not be called universities.

I would agree and my use of the term University is not necessarily meant to be used in that traditional sense. What I believe is that there should be an alternative to Universities that could focus more on that aspect and present you with a 4 year degree.

I guarantee if you created a tech school that focuses strictly on tech related classes for 4 years compared to a University that you would produce higher quality students than you would from schools that spend half of your college teaching you things that are not directly related to your job.

Re: Google commits $1B in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs

#350

Post by Chiba-City » Fri, Oct 13, 2017, 2:22 PM UTC

Start with basic observations. Tool acquisition is not tool mastery. Tool mastery does not mean jobs for or at Google. Janitors are not getting IPO payouts for lives of leisure. Cold war coastal higher education, city living and corporate trading prowess have drained many interior communities of their best brains throughout decades of deindustrialization and deskilling.

Some better nerds here can hardly imagine perfectly smart people who cannot yet touch type or turn a spreadsheet into a group calendar. Our miraculous simple decision support tools are still opaque to majorities of Americans. Only Americans far outside Google will create value to create jobs. That takes planning for any possible sweat equity or financial investment. We have generations of people to train with tools. The boy genius prizes for ever new tooling are not really separate concerns. Cultivating and harvest new boy geniuses from the field is expensive. They don't exactly grow on trees.

Google like Apple or Microsoft had to discover and rediscover their own relevance. They cultivate their markets now with intensive growth. This is a good move.