Live data from Hacker News

Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

alexchesser.medium.com

421–430 of 633 posts

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would seem to indicate that 54% of "software developers" are white.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Over half.

If 10% of white software developers are women, that's not over half.

But assuming 100% of white software developers are men, 54% is still not within the normal range of the word "dominated".

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ironic that so many companies are using such an efficient programming language to implement the most horribly, deliberately wasteful computations on the planet. I got into rust because I want to do meaningful work efficiently not proof-of-meaningless-work.

Not sure if you're just calling blockchain development meaningless work in general, or referencing proof-of-work, which refers to meaningless computation done for blockchain security despite the unnecessary wastefulness. If you're referencing the latter, maybe it's worth pointing out that all the blockchains using Rust (or the popular ones anyway) are proof of stake.

Still arguably not the most meaningful use of storage space

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#423
> No one ever explained to me that recruiters are also one of the best career resources you can find.

For increasing your salary, and potentially finding a role you'd take. I'd not categorize this as "career resources" -- there's so much more important stuff like figuring out what you want out of your career and keeping on track with it.

Why do people focus on money so much when making career changes? Sure, you'll get more in your next job because the current salary is a piece of leverage to use. But if it's only about money, why did you accept your current job?

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly recommend using a Google Voice number for recruiters for just such a reason. I keep all my interviewing data isolated from my private data.

These days I just never answer the actual phone for anyone. I don’t even bother to look who is calling.

Why not? Do you get too many scam calls or robo calls?

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#425
Recruiters and estate agents seem to be the smarmiest individuals I've ever come across. I'm not sure why that is, but the pattern is obvious.

I really don't understand why we're expected to trust the largest transactions in our lives (house/job) to individuals with no real qualifications to execute those transactions. It feels kinda dumb.

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#426
post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the difference between luck and privilege?

I'm hoping your question isn't serious but just in case you don't know the difference between the two: Luck - success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one's own actions. Privilege - a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group. Hope this is helpful

Privilege: being lucky enough to be born/raised in the right circumstances

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These days I just never answer the actual phone for anyone. I don’t even bother to look who is calling.

Why not? Do you get too many scam calls or robo calls?

99% of the phone calls I get from unknown numbers are some combination of scam/robo/or just immediate hang up. The only exceptions tend to be businesses responding to my initial contact (eg, trying to get a plumber out to my house), in which case I will answer unknown numbers for a day or two until we connect. Otherwise nope.

This is a US mobile number that I've ported from carrier to carrier since the mid-00s. Haven't been particularly careful about where I use the number, which is probably how it got this bad.

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#428
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're already extremely out of band and are pretty sure your range will be higher than 95% of your incoming offers, I do not recommend doing this. Never give first numbers, and if you're in software and haven't gotten past the middling, typical startup salary numbers and onto the mind-blowingly high numbers, you will not feel confident enough to handle a negotiation where you've already given away too much in…

> Never give first numbers I disagree: the first one who gives a number is able to anchor the negotiation around their preferred outcome; it's much harder to negotiate up from a lowball number than the other way around.

The preferred outcome of the company is making a successful hire, so they will go high enough to make sure they get a great candidate, or if they can't afford that, will go to their max budget. And if they don't then you don't want to work there anyway.

There is no situation where you will say a high number and they will move up to meet you if that number was greater than their max budget to begin with.

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#429
To be honest, even with a cut and pasted initial reply, this sounds like more effort than it's worth. I don't want to have to respond to the recruiter's response. My mental energy is valuable. I don't need to spend it on job opportunities I'm not interested in.

Re: Career advice nobody gave me: Never ignore a recruiter

#430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can see, the only thing outsourced recruiters provide is blame-shifting. They're not better at judging candidates. They're not better at finding candidates. They're almost certainly worse at understanding what the company needs than the company, and worse at understanding what the candidate has to offer than the candidate. But, if the company hires a few people they're unhappy with through a recruiter (wh…

Does this blame shifting really happen though? I've never seen recruiters get blamed for a bad hire. I've seen them get blamed for sending people that fail at the first interview though.

I’ve only seen the blame shifting work at another layer: HR dept telling us that they made their best by engaging a recruiting firm, they can do us a favor by finding other recruiters, but it’s not on them if all the candidates we get sent are mismatched.
Post reply on HN