421–430 of 469 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And a serviceable refurbished iPhone isn't that much more, e.g. https://swappa.com/listings/apple-iphone-se-2nd-gen?carrier=...
ok, but could that mean many people that are assumed to have new devices could actually be using older devices?
As someone who's recently been hiring (sorry folks, position was filled just a few days ago), it's wild to me how distorted things have become. We had 1200 applications for an extremely niche role. A huge amount were clearly faked resumes that far too closely matched the job description to be realistic. Another huge portion were just unqualified. The irony is that there actually _are_ a ton of exceptionally qualified…
It’s pretty much always who you know… at least to get a showing. It’s rare in history to find counter examples. And in a LLM fueled world it’s going to be more important. Companies can improve by ensuring they don’t hire _because_ of whom someone knows. It should only ever let you get in the room to interview. So practical advice of what to do: be human. Get to know people. Care. Your time to do this is not when you’…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When the requirements of every single job are impossible, people will lie. Several people have been recommending candidates to lie for IT-related jobs for a long time now, and honestly, I think the vast majority of positions have such a crazy set of requirements that they only get the lairs.
Amusing Idea: Advertise three vaguely-similar positions, only one of them real. Specify impossible-for-honest-humans requirements for the fake two. Then discard all applicants for the real position who also claimed to be qualified for a fake one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the analogue of the exceptionally good-looking STD super-spreaders would be... the resume-driven-development self-proclaimed "10x devs" who job-hop every 6 months, leaving a wake of disasters?
Statistically the majority of STDs spread by sexual activity are spread by gay men.
In hindsight and in the future, I would phrase the point differently.
Four months? Six months? Is that supposed to be a long time? I know people that have been in this situation for nearly two years now. Forget hopeless, it's a bottomless pit of despair. I don't know how to help them, and neither does anyone else. But they keep trying and doing whatever they can. The argument of "have hope, almost everyone picks themselves up eventually!" doesn't work when you're the one who is actuall…
> Tell them you’re unemployed, what do you get? “Oh yeah I was unemployed one month ten years ago boy that sucked.” Yes, friend, yes it does suck right now six months in, and unlike your little story there I don’t know when or if it will ever stop.
This is on point, but then the author completely misses the mark a following paragraph.
> How often have you known somebody whose life was really, finally wrecked by unemployment?
I don't know anybody in my situation. The people I know send one job application, get an interview, and get an offer. I don't know how they do it. They don't know how they do it.
People look at me like I must not be trying very hard because it's trivial for them to get a job and infer that it must be for me as well.
The author says
> It won’t turn out as bad as you fear.
And continues by asking how many people does the reader know go homeless from being unemployed?
> I’m talking about who do you personally know who’s had it go that badly?
Homelessness is just a weird way to frame that. A family friend is the only other person I can think of in a similar situation to me - mid 30s, university educated, very unemployed - and they're living with their parents.
That doesn't mean they're not having a really bad time. Or that its not bad for society in general when we waste human capitol like this. She had motivation enough to travel out of country to get her degree. She is educated, but had no place in society, no career or family of her own now. That isn't fine just because she isn't homeless.
My savings are gone and even when I lose my home this year I will have social support structures, like living with family. I won't go homeless but that doesn't mean my career isn't over or that things aren't that bad.
I'm not even worried about being homeless.
I'd sleep in a tent if every day I woke up to doing what I loved.
I am worried that every day for the rest of my life will be worse than the day before it because nobody will work with me and nobody wants me on this earth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can that be unreasonable? To work at least half a week for a decision which will cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, or even millions of dollars in the long run. What else is the manager doing which is more important monetary wise? And if managers are really too busy with raking in the millions to the company, then it's a fine time to hire somebody who's only job will be to hire more people (not a…
The manager is responsible for $X but only gets paid their salary. I'm their day to day, hiring is a pain. They need the extra hands, but they have to go through more work to get that person onboard. The activation energy is high, higher now with AI and automated job applications clogging things up. Then you have onboarding and the continued costs of management of that person. Honestly, most managers would want the s…
> The manager is responsible for $X but only gets paid their salary.
That's why somebody higher in rank makes sure the manager gets the time he needs to make the best hires. Somewhere up the line there is somebody who cares about the basics of running a business right.
> I'm their day to day, hiring is a pain.
Of course it's a pain, that's why it's a job and why people get paid for it.
> This is also why AI is appealing. The promise of no sick days, no HR complaints, no chit chat. Just pure work done in plain language. Work done overnight, right, the first time. A middle managers dream worker.
Okay, but that means the company instantly lost all customers and all income and went bankrupt. Because why in the world would a client hire your company to use an AI, when they can just use the AI themselves? And don't say that there needs to be a human who is specialized in using the AI, because then you're back at hiring and having employees again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you’re just arguing for nepotism in a roundabout way. My senior staff engineer can’t code at all. He got hired because he was friends with our engineering manager. You might say “well that’s nepotism then since he’s under qualified”, but I’m sure he would make the argument that he got the job because of his “stellar reputation and extensive network”. It’s an abhorrent situation to be in. Everyone knows he can…
> My senior staff engineer can’t code at all. He got hired because he was friends with our engineering manager. Well thats how it works everywhere. You have to suck up and pretent to be 'friends' with person with the power to get promoted too.
Faking it is pathetic behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's either extraordinarily tactless to suggest this, or on purpose, so soon after the assassination of a political figure.
You're referring to Minnesota state representative Melissa Hortman, right?
the media coverage difference says everything
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The median American also owns $39,000 in liquid financial assets. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf23.pdf (page 22, “Financial Assets” section)
It doesn't say liquid assets though, it mentions multiple options which vary in how easily you can/should use one to pay an unexpected bill or period of unemployment. For example, if one is using their life-insurance payouts to pay their rent... well, something has gone very wrong somewhere. Specifically, this part: > financial asset—which includes transaction accounts, certificates of deposit, savings bonds, other b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The median American also owns $39,000 in liquid financial assets. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf23.pdf (page 22, “Financial Assets” section)
Again I don’t think that means what you think it means. It says “value of all financial assets” which includes banking accounts, cds, stocks, bonds etc. that is not liquid. The next exact line it calls out those bank accounts and the mean at $8,000. That is not a lot of liquid emergency savings for a household let’s say of 3. So I don’t think your point stands.