The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage • Hacker News Board

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#101

Post by collyw » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 4:46 PM UTC

bowlofpetunias wrote: post #96

eranation wrote: post #58

There is no shortage of bad programmers, there are plenty of medium programmers, it's also not that hard to find decent programmers. It's harder to find good programmers, but much harder to find great ones. The thing is that a great programmer can do 5X more than a good programmer, that can do 2X more than a decent one, that can do 2X more than a medium one. It's not just the number of features they can write in a gi…

I would describe that as simply "being professionals". No magic n-time programmers, just mature pros. What you're describing as a great programmer is the equivalent of a chef in the kitchen, what you're describing as good programmer is a talented amateur cook, and your medium programmers are ordinary people that can cook an edible meal. We have a shortage of professional developers, and a huge number of people who wo…

I think a realisation of something similar made me decide to call myself a software engineer rather than programmer.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#102

Post by collyw » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 5:05 PM UTC

ranci wrote: post #45

aviraldg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More developers might not solve a problem faster, but they will drive down wages (even for skilled developers)

There is a lot of crying and worrying about wages on here right now. If you are from CS or SE, you don't have the right to cry about a saturated job market driving down your wages. They are plenty high. If you want people with real problems, look at the graphic design industry. $10/hr can get you your pick of the litter among several applicants who have over 20 years experience in one of the biggest cities in the Uni…

Wages are plenty high in the States, or places like London. The rest of us are not on anything special.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#103

Post by collyw » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 5:19 PM UTC

firstOrder wrote: post #51

dblacc wrote: post #19

I thought the whole shortage for demand argument was to do with the lack of talent that was being produced, rather than simply the number of people who had a bachelors degree.

I don't know how many jobs I've seen out there where they have an incredibly high bar to hire someone, and then it is 99% CRUD work. Some of the AI jobs at Google, yes, they need good people. Amazon needs some good engineers at the top guiding the creation of EC2 architecture. But most jobs ask for a much higher caliber of people than they actually need.

I don't get why CRUD work is so under appreciated here on HN.

I do CRUD work (at least I think I do - I create and maintain the database and front end for a DNA sequencing centre). I have in in depth understanding of SQL - my database returns some moderately complex results. I have solid database design and optimization skills. I know Django in depth. I know Python well. I have a solid understanding of Linux, and know enough to get Django running on the server. I have read up a fair bit on NoSQL, but have yet to find a suitable use case for it. I can do some Javascript / HTML / CSS.

Bioinformatics on the other hand seems to be considered a lot more brain power, when most of it is just scripts to count stuff an plot it on a graph. Its' (often) an order of magnitude simpler than what I do. The majority of bioinformaticains I know have never used a debugger - so the code can't be too complex - or they are WAY smarter than me.

Or when people talk of CRUD, do they mean the sort of thing you should use MS Access for?

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#104

Post by geebee » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:06 PM UTC

jshen wrote: post #35

michaelochurch wrote: post #28

Well, there is a shortage of competent software engineers willing to sacrifice as much as corporate executives think they should, for what corporate executives think such people should be paid. In the same vein, there's a shortage of supermodels who want to fuck obese, unemployed men with halitosis and general poor hygiene.

I think you're wrong. I have the hardest time finding good engineers, we pay very well, we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime, etc. Can we make this more concrete? What sacrifices do you think is being asked of competent developers? What pay do you think they are offered?

Here are some ways I think this could be more concrete:

"we pay well" What is the salary range for this position? If you have already hired into this role, what are you paying them? I'd say a specific number is important here, rather than "market rate" (if you say market rate, It's important to define it with a number).

"we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime" How many hours, on average, does someone in this role work a week? If you offer vacation, how much time off do you offer? How many paid days off per year? If you don't do those things (many companies don't do vacation time anymore), what are the average number of days take off per week.

"good engineers", "competent developers" How do you define this? This is probably hardest of all, but if you already have someone in this role... what degrees do these workers typically hold? How many years of experience is typical? Could you share specific examples of interview questions, and what kind of response is required for an offer to be made? Could you share an example of a problem solved on the job that represents the kind of work someone like this does?

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#105

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:38 PM UTC

jacalata wrote: post #88

jshen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people. Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after i…

So you're asking people to apply for a job without telling them how much you will pay, and you think that this lack of information shouldn't affect whether they apply? Salary sensitive potential hires might be ruling themselves out at the application stage: for instance my assumption (as a software engineer) would be that if I have no idea what your salary offer will be, then it will be shit - if it's going to be dec…

Show me a company that advertises it publicly.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#106

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:43 PM UTC

droithomme wrote: post #74

jshen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people. Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after i…

Please state the salary you offer, the location of your company, whether or not you pay full relocation, and the skill set you are looking for.

We have engineers making up to $250k total comp most are in the $150-200 range, we have offices in LA, Palo alto, and NY, we pay relocation of some kind, and we want generalists that are really good.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#107

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:45 PM UTC

firstOrder wrote: post #78

jshen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people. Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after i…

ExxonMobil brought in $469 billion in revenue last year, on which they made $44 billion in profit. It's not a big gamble for them at all if some programmer who gets $100k, $150k or whatever does not work out. Of course, some bootstrapped company, or some company which had minimal angel funding or the like is taking more of a gamble, but everything is a gamble when you have no product/market fit and only 18 months or…

Exxon is in the top ten for revenue, that is not a good example on your part. also, $100k is not a large salary in my book. Doubling it is the sort of gamble I'm talking about.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#108

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:46 PM UTC

PhantomGremlin wrote: post #73

jshen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people. Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after i…

> we have a problem with finding enough good people I'd love to see one of your job postings. I'd bet at least one of the following is happening: 1) unreasonable academic requirements 2) unreasonably broad list of required previous experience 3) unqualified HR people pre-screening and discarding resumes You need to be willing to "kiss a lot of frogs", i.e. do phone screens and onsite interviews, of people who might g…

The answer to all three questions is no.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#109

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:48 PM UTC

firstOrder wrote: post #63

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could just be a run of bad luck or not enough advertising on their part. Supply can't meet demand if supply doesn't know demand exists.

I agree about making an effort looking for people. I know nothing about the company being discussed here. But for other companies, I know some that contact a (crappy) headhunter or two, or who post an ad on Craigslist, and then expect top tier candidates to roll in. For some CRUD job working in class C office space for relatively not much money etc. They're shocked when they don't have their pick from dozens of top t…

Not only do we go to meetups and conferences, we host them. At some point you may want to consider the possibility that I know what I'm talking about.

Re: The Myth of the Science and Engineering Shortage

#110

Post by jshen » Sun, Mar 23, 2014, 6:52 PM UTC

geebee wrote: post #104

jshen wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're wrong. I have the hardest time finding good engineers, we pay very well, we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime, etc. Can we make this more concrete? What sacrifices do you think is being asked of competent developers? What pay do you think they are offered?

Here are some ways I think this could be more concrete: "we pay well" What is the salary range for this position? If you have already hired into this role, what are you paying them? I'd say a specific number is important here, rather than "market rate" (if you say market rate, It's important to define it with a number). "we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime" How many hours, on average, does someone in this r…

I asked theperson i was replying to if he could be concrete. If you agree with him why dont you tell me why in a concrete way? Or tell me what are you trying to prove and how, and I may give you concrete info.