STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp • Hacker News Board

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#191

Post by jaynos » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:05 PM UTC

ap22213 wrote: post #154

glesica wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A newly minted Phd, is one type of person that I've found myself having trouble hiring. Same with an newly minted Masters. The PhD issue makes some sense, a person who just spent two to four years becoming an expert in a narrow area of specialization may want to use that knowledge, and may not be all that much more valuable if you don't need it (especially since his or her other skills may not have "kept up"). Howe…

As someone who occasionally hires, a masters doesn't really show much in terms of talent, but it does sometimes show a level of specialization. And, there are times when I need a specialist (e.g. image processing, feature analysis, statistics, etc.). But, generally, I don't need a lot of specialists. Also, there seem to be two types of people who go for masters. There are those that really love their particular speci…

Third group. People who already have an Undergrad degree in another field and are using the Masters Degree to switch careers.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#192

Post by curiousDog » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:09 PM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #74

While there certainly are companies whose business model is to get cheap workforce from India or China on H1B (just take a look at H1B stats), there is something I don't get. Where and how this pay inequality for local vs. imported workforce manifests for more desirable companies like Google or Facebook? As a student outside United States I had a chance to do internships in the US several times (on J1 visa), and as I…

An important point is that H1Bs basically increase the supply of talented engineers. So even though they're being paid salaries equivalent to their American peers at MSFT/GOOG, without them, the Americans would be making a lot more. With a shortage of engineers, who knows, may be the starting salary would've been $200k instead of $100k. I personally think this is a good thing and keeps America competitive. But some would argue otherwise.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#193

Post by ap22213 » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:10 PM UTC

jaynos wrote: post #191

ap22213 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who occasionally hires, a masters doesn't really show much in terms of talent, but it does sometimes show a level of specialization. And, there are times when I need a specialist (e.g. image processing, feature analysis, statistics, etc.). But, generally, I don't need a lot of specialists. Also, there seem to be two types of people who go for masters. There are those that really love their particular speci…

Third group. People who already have an Undergrad degree in another field and are using the Masters Degree to switch careers.

Good point.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#194

Post by doktrin » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:10 PM UTC

Tohhou wrote: post #187

doktrin wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When they have a lot of experience but nothing useful to contribute they blame things which do not factor in at all in hiring. You're relying on make-believe scenario to argue a point. > I think you are mistaking my snark for me actually asserting things. Sure. > Whose responsibility is it to fix the apparent ageism if the people complaining about it don't want to do anything to solve their own problems? Who, aside…

>You're relying on make-believe scenario to argue a point. I live in a reality where technology is constantly changing, where people need to learn new things or get left behind in their usefulness. If they have years of experience in software or systems which no one uses anymore that doesn't guarantee them anything. >It's an industry wide issue which is actually being addressed. People solving their own problems inst…

> Then mission accomplished! Wait, so companies really were not hiring the best people who give them the most value and now suddenly are thanks to people speaking up? When did all of this happen?

being addressed != addressed

This discussion has obviously run its course.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#195

Post by doktrin » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:12 PM UTC

Tohhou wrote: post #190

doktrin wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Technology changes fast and what is useful to know now won't be in 15 years. This claim is bandied about way too carelessly. Application level tools do change quite fast. The fundamentals of technology do not. Knowledge of networking, TCP/IP, x86 assembly, stack discipline, cache implementations, etc. is comparatively timeless. For instance, one of CMU's core CS/ECE classes (213) has been taught in roughly the same…

I would argue that the number of people needed for older technology is finitely limited not that they are no longer needed. There may be demand for older technology, but the majority of new jobs won't be for older technology. >is comparatively timeless Why are companies apparently hiring younger people over older people who are vastly more experienced and given that timeless knowledge would give so much more value to…

> I would argue that the number of people needed for older technology is finitely limited not that they are no longer needed. There may be demand for older technology, but the majority of new jobs won't be for older technology

Obviously no-one is being hired to write x86 assembly. It's taught because it's relevant, important and timeless.

> Why are companies apparently hiring younger people over older people who are vastly more experienced and given that timeless knowledge would give so much more value to their companies? Are they just plain stupid?

Like most of your arguments, this is a logical fallacy. You're appealing to authority and the status quo, without actually addressing any of the issues head on.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#196

Post by Kluny » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:15 PM UTC

eranation wrote: post #115

not_paul_graham wrote: post #14

Very well written article and I can add some context being in the unhired category of engineers. I graduated from Georgia Tech sometime in the last couple of years with a 3.64 GPA. I know that GPA doesn't mean much but really at Georgia Tech they make you work for it like a dog. I have some projects on GitHub and well I thought companies would come knocking at my door. Boy was I mistaken. So I started applying late i…

I can tell you that sadly accent can have more weight than we all wish it would have. It's a double issue, even if you are interviewing with the most liberal and ethical person who loves you and think you're a great fit but had problem understanding due to heavy accent, it's not in your favor. And even if your accent it's only light, there are sadly still people out there that will even subconsciously prefer the cand…

I agree about accent, but I want to encourage the parent post by saying that since his written English is excellent, he may be able to avoid that discrimination by sticking to text communication until he's established a relationship with someone at the interviewing company. This is what I try to do - I'm hard of hearing, and someone who doesn't understand the implications of that can easily jump to the conclusion that I'm an idiot or dishonest if I hesitate in answering a question. It just takes longer to process speech when someone changes topics quickly.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#197

Post by sizzle » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:25 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #114

lmm wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's that simple. At the trivial and obvious level, you need to speak a common language. But even if you're both speaking English, you can communicate much more effectively if you have a shared cultural background that you can both refer to.

that is an extremely macro level of culture that does not explain why there are so few women, hispanics, and african-americans in technology. They aren't that different of a culture. Certainly far less of a cultural difference than all of the H1Bs they're hiring. You're not getting the point. All of you who keep parroting your master's "cultural fit" line are not seeing the lie for what it is worth. It's not about cu…

so, what's it about then?

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#198

Post by Tohhou » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:27 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #195

Tohhou wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that the number of people needed for older technology is finitely limited not that they are no longer needed. There may be demand for older technology, but the majority of new jobs won't be for older technology. >is comparatively timeless Why are companies apparently hiring younger people over older people who are vastly more experienced and given that timeless knowledge would give so much more value to…

> I would argue that the number of people needed for older technology is finitely limited not that they are no longer needed. There may be demand for older technology, but the majority of new jobs won't be for older technology Obviously no-one is being hired to write x86 assembly. It's taught because it's relevant, important and timeless. > Why are companies apparently hiring younger people over older people who are…

>Obviously no-one is being hired to write x86 assembly. It's taught because it's relevant, important and timeless.

Not everything is timeless. Not everything everyone specializes now will be timeless. Some knowledge will be useful always, but if there is not demand for the timeless positions, or demand shrinks rather than grows, then even if someone has timeless knowledge that may not actually be useful in them getting hired, because what they know wouldn't give value to companies looking to hire.

>You're appealing to authority and the status quo, without actually addressing any of the issues head on.

I refuse to accept without evidence that companies are only hiring younger people because of their youth and not because they give the company some kind of competitive advantage.

>Like most of your arguments, this is a logical fallacy.

That was a question, which was refused any answer, not an argument. You are asserting that people have timeless knowledge making them more valuable employees than younger people without that timeless knowledge. I'm asking why then do companies make hiring decisions which go against their interests.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#199

Post by Tohhou » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:30 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #194

Tohhou wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You're relying on make-believe scenario to argue a point. I live in a reality where technology is constantly changing, where people need to learn new things or get left behind in their usefulness. If they have years of experience in software or systems which no one uses anymore that doesn't guarantee them anything. >It's an industry wide issue which is actually being addressed. People solving their own problems inst…

> Then mission accomplished! Wait, so companies really were not hiring the best people who give them the most value and now suddenly are thanks to people speaking up? When did all of this happen? being addressed != addressed This discussion has obviously run its course.

Get back to me in 15 years when ageism is no longer something people complain about.

Won't happen. It will always be like this. People who refuse to adapt blame others instead of doing something about their own problems. If anything people will invent new isms to blame their problems on.

Re: STEM Shortage Claims and Facebook's $19 Billion Acquisition of WhatsApp

#200

Post by michaelochurch » Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 7:31 PM UTC

nostrademons wrote: post #182

seivan wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Companies like Yahoo have talent, but can't recognize it at the bottom because the middle-management filter is so defective.' This.

It's not quite that - it's that the organizational structure prevents middle-managers from acting on their knowledge even if they do recognize talent. Imagine that you are responsible for a department of people, all of whom need to work together to accomplish a big job. Assume that talent is normally distributed - maybe you have 1 superstar and 1 idiot, 10 high performers and 10 laggards, and 100 average developers.…

You make a really strong point. I think the problem you described above is why, in truth, closed allocation tech companies are destined to fail. Closed/open allocation is a continuum in reality, but the more closed a technology company is, the quicker it rots.

The "Real Googler Line" concept (and, as you know, I was only at Google for half a year and have no insight into what the place is like now) is the recognition that, above a certain level of recognized merit, people should be trusted to allocate their time and energies. As you said, people just below the trust thermocline where it goes from open to closed allocation (on whom the company relies to perform the most thankless, ugliest tasks) get resentful. You don't have a solution until you lower that trust thermocline down to the people who aren't capable of doing useful work, who you don't want to retain anyway.

The only conclusion I can reach is that a closed-allocation tech company doesn't work. I realize that open allocation isn't right for all industries, but in software, it seems to have minimal downside, incredible upside, and no reasonable alternative.

So, I agree with you. One shouldn't fix a tech company by elevating a couple top performers. (They'll get lonely.) One should go to full open allocation, and then those political issues go away.