My advice is : work with more senior people. It seems to me that people with 10/15+ years of experience will judge this hype train more severely than younger ones. The dangerous spot is engineers with 5-10 years of xp who have become good enough at writing huge piles of unecessary code and have them work.
I've said it before, but I take issue with just about everything that's happened in tech in the last 20 years. I've been programming since I was 12, so have about 32 years of experience. I feel that things really were the very best from about 1995-1999, but since then we've mostly had uninspired and brute-force solutions endlessly doubling down on the status quo, because that's where the money is apparently.
I just see such quick embrace of things like async, which I view as an anti-pattern. We're paying people $150/hr to build out complex solutions that nontechnical people were putting together in FileMaker and Microsoft Access in the 80s and 90s. Even our hardware has endlessly pursued DSP vector processing on GPUs, forcing us to manually convert our software to shaders or something proprietary, when scalable transputers and 1000+ core systems on a chip with local memories appearing as a single context (what we might call.. desktop computing) would have been so much simpler and better. I could go on about this stuff literally forever.
What's the solution? It's so simple that it's right under our noses: make the opposite decisions from the ones we have been making. Old school. Practice radical inclusion and hire people immediately based on their credentials and experience, rather than putting them through endless interview rounds. Bootstrap, and when you make it, pay it forward and help others make it. Get away from all this insubstantial profit-oriented disruption stuff and solve the actual problems in people's lives like how to reduce their dependency on handouts from the rich under trickle-down economics. We need automated food/clothing/shelter that's too cheap to meter, and we need it yesterday.