We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#301

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 8:48 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #259

scarface74 wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t graduate from an elite college. I graduated from a no name college over 20 years ago. Software engineering jobs are a dime a dozen. I’ve also only worked for a company that anyone has ever heard of for a couple of years. If someone hinted that they wouldn’t hire me because when I left work, I shut down my computer and didn’t think about software development until the next day, that would be a hard pass. I wo…

You're right there are a bunch of software development jobs out there! Certainly enough that any skilled developer can find one. That being said, for me as a manager, I like to hire people who demonstrate the ability to repeatedly ship products. It helps if they've owned that product from conception, through delivery all the way to support. That's a skill that is in great demand and I've never been disappointed when…

It doesn’t say anything about how well you can “ship” a product because you posted it to Github.

“shipping a product” involves knowing what trade offs to make, deadlines, working with QA, deployment strategies, documentation, not breaking preexisting code, etc., dealing with security and regulatory audits, etc.

Nothing about posting a pet project on Github gives a signal about shipping a product in the real world.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#302

Post by boring_twenties » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 8:51 PM UTC

mitchty wrote: post #292

boring_twenties wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone that lives code > programmer that never goes out to socialize. I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work. If I have social plans with my friends I'll likely cancel them if there's a bona fide work emergency. If I have family obligations I cannot and will not. > I'd rather meet and make friends OK, and I'd rather ski for an hour or…

> I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work. What exactly does this mean? I prioritize A LOT over work. My back hurts, work can suck it. I get into an accident, again, work takes a hell of a back seat. If a family member is having issues, guess what, work may not be my highest priority. I'm a human, not a robot. > Having kids is a lifestyle…

> I get into an accident, again, work takes a hell of a back seat.

Sure, but those are unexpected and hopefully rare events. We're talking about things that take priority over work every single day.

> > Having kids is a lifestyle choice that is at odds with other choices.

> That is self evident, what is your underlying non analogy point?

What I mean to put it bluntly is that having kids means less time for other things, including work. Make that tradeoff if you want, but don't to make the negative consequences of your choice my problem.

> > If you want society to subsidize having children, then the government should do it, not individual software teams.

> Software teams are a part of society are they not?

Sure they are, what's your point?

Society should probably help out homeless people, but that means collecting taxes and providing services, not expecting individual families to invite them into their homes and feed and clothe them, etc.

> I love programming, but I have other things in life I want to pursue

Same here, but I'm not the one complaining that a team of people who don't share that requirement isn't hiring me, bending over backwards to accommodate me, and paying me the same as their top performers.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#303

Post by eikenberry » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 8:56 PM UTC

plughs wrote: post #45

One frustration I've had recently is the number of companies encouraging or requiring code in the public sphere. They want to see open-source contributions or an active and impressive personal github page. If your employer is protective of their IP ( mine is ) and/or you are not willing to spend evenings and and weekends on pet projects, you are out of the running. Also >But if you think programmers aren't elitist, t…

Requiring a software portfolio makes sense if you think of programming as an art form. Just about every professional artist has a portfolio of some sort and the current status quo for a portfolio in software is open source projects or code in a public repo (usually github).

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#304

Post by malvosenior » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 8:58 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #301

malvosenior wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right there are a bunch of software development jobs out there! Certainly enough that any skilled developer can find one. That being said, for me as a manager, I like to hire people who demonstrate the ability to repeatedly ship products. It helps if they've owned that product from conception, through delivery all the way to support. That's a skill that is in great demand and I've never been disappointed when…

It doesn’t say anything about how well you can “ship” a product because you posted it to Github. “shipping a product” involves knowing what trade offs to make, deadlines, working with QA, deployment strategies, documentation, not breaking preexisting code, etc., dealing with security and regulatory audits, etc. Nothing about posting a pet project on Github gives a signal about shipping a product in the real world.

Sure it does. Are they solving a problem they were able to define? What does the shipping history for their project look like? Did they make interesting design choices and tradeoffs. Shipping any software is an accomplishment and does a lot more to demonstrate your skills than leetcode interviews.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#305

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 8:59 PM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #283

mitchty wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All else equal, isn't it clearly better to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, than someone who has to be out of the office at 5pm every day to deal with their kids? No it isn't clearly better. Note, I'm single but proposing that someone that lives code as being better than someone that stops to smell the roses of life is a bit too much. You're also discriminating for people that may be horrible…

> someone that lives code > programmer that never goes out to socialize. I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work. If I have social plans with my friends I'll likely cancel them if there's a bona fide work emergency. If I have family obligations I cannot and will not. > I'd rather meet and make friends OK, and I'd rather ski for an hour or…

I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work.

Why wouldn’t I put many things as a high priority than work? I don’t have any equity in the company and even if I did, it’s statistically likely to be worthless if it isn’t a publicly held company. If it is a publicly held company, my contribution isn’t going to make or break it.

The company definitely doesn’t put me as a high priority.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#306

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:02 PM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #298

ghaff wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should not have made a personal attack. But I really would encourage you to consider what others have written and think about why your take on hiring is not healthy and may even be actively discriminatory against a protected class.

You'll be happy to know I have nothing to do with hiring of any kind, but just as an individual contributor it seems quite unhealthy to me to work on a team where work is my #1 priority, but everyone else's distant second. I suspect you'd find it quite ridiculous to have to pick up my slack as I have to run at 5pm to practice with my bandmates, at least if you weren't paid correspondingly more for the extra effort. C…

Well, I would say that if you make work your number one priority for a company that you don’t own, it’s very naive. If you got hit by a bus tomorrow, the company would send flowers to your funeral and have an open req out for your position before you’re buried.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#307

Post by boring_twenties » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:03 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #305

boring_twenties wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> someone that lives code > programmer that never goes out to socialize. I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work. If I have social plans with my friends I'll likely cancel them if there's a bona fide work emergency. If I have family obligations I cannot and will not. > I'd rather meet and make friends OK, and I'd rather ski for an hour or…

I never said that someone has to live and breathe work, only that they don't have anything _higher priority_ than work. Why wouldn’t I put many things as a high priority than work? I don’t have any equity in the company and even if I did, it’s statistically likely to be worthless if it isn’t a publicly held company. If it is a publicly held company, my contribution isn’t going to make or break it. The company definit…

> Why wouldn’t I put many things as a high priority than work?

Presumably, because you expect to get paid more than someone who doesn't.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#308

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:04 PM UTC

bradlys wrote: post #100

MS90 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just frustrating because not everyone wants to spend 24/7 working at a computer, some of us have other hobbies and prefer to keep a good work/life balance. I already get paid to code 8 hours a day, the last thing I want to do is go home and do it for free. Would an architect get denied employment because they didn't have a "pet project" skyscraper in their backyard to show off?

I get the idea but I don't think people expect you to do this all the time. It's more to back up a resume that's weak in other areas. (no name companies, no name University, etc. And this is all relevant to the area you're applying, what is no name somewhere is a name known elsewhere) I found having some open source contributions was a positive for my resume. People knew I could ship something then. They could litera…

Like I said before - I graduated from a no name college and a no name company and my average turn around time from looking to having at least two reasonable offers is less than three weeks - in 20 years.

I haven’t done any side projects since 1994.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#309

Post by scarface74 » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:05 PM UTC

malvosenior wrote: post #87

MS90 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just frustrating because not everyone wants to spend 24/7 working at a computer, some of us have other hobbies and prefer to keep a good work/life balance. I already get paid to code 8 hours a day, the last thing I want to do is go home and do it for free. Would an architect get denied employment because they didn't have a "pet project" skyscraper in their backyard to show off?

It's not about denying you employment. It's about hiring someone who can ship software. If someone has publicly shipped software and you can see that, they make for a good candidate. It seems reasonable to me that people who really love writing software and do it a lot would get jobs and be successful in the industry. I wouldn't judge them on their work/life balance, some people really do enjoy programming that much.

There is a huge difference between “shipping software” and doing a git push.....

I’ve actually “shipped software” that got put on production servers and people paid money for.

Re: We Only Hire the Trendiest (2016)

#310

Post by Karrot_Kream » Thu, Dec 12, 2019, 9:07 PM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #234

throwawaymath wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be more charitable to the commenter's point, that's not what's being asserted as discriminatory. They're making the claim that it's implicitly discriminatory to penalize people who don't spend time on programming outside of work, because that reasonably penalizes people who are older (i.e. more likely to have a family). They are not making the claim that choosing to hire someone better than someone else is discrim…

Why is it discriminatory? All else equal, isn't it clearly better to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, than someone who has to be out of the office at 5pm every day to deal with their kids?

But all else is not equal, and this is what I find incredibly silly. You have a very strong prior on time when that is probably just one of many factors. Experience, efficiency, the ability to work well with others, organizational ability, and perspicacity are just a few of the several other things that goes into being an effective engineer.

Moreover you don't seem to balance your time prior out with others. Sure, time may have an effect, but what if this effect is marginal? This also gets down to something that bothers me about this line of thinking, which is the desire to create overly simplistic models of talent. Talent is incredibly multi-faceted, and hiring based on pithy narratives without actually looking at data is how we ended up in this situation where class signalling or age has become a substitute for talent.