131–140 of 381 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can have all the skills and education you want, if employers are unreasonable about their hiring and requirements, you have no control or recourse. You have to be lucky (including knowing someone, ie networking), not necessarily good.
There is a very large number of employers. If you want to convince me they're all unreasonable, you'll need to show me some pretty compelling evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>One issue is that not everyone loves learning stuff. Agreed. I do work with some folks who are all "OMG I have to work with this archaic mess." way too often. And I don't disagree with them, but man... not that hard to learn it and code your way out of it. But no they just complain. Hard to really find out who REALLY has the interest in fighting through the unexpected / rough spots.
I personally love working with most legacy systems. It is so satisfying learning all that weirdness and peering into the minds of the original authors to then hopefully get to clean it up and make it better. But of course a handful are just horrible.
You also get a feel for the history of various things too.
I work with a big old Coldfusion system at times. Server side rendering was a thing in the past too ;)
It's not any kind of paradox. Structural unemployment happens when the skills of the work force don't match the needs of employers, so there is both unemployment and difficulty hiring. Structural unemployment is usually high when there's a rapid change in demand for skills, as of course there is in tech. It results in crazy high salaries too. People with machine learning experience are getting 7-figure offers, while…
Structural unemployment happens when the perceived skills of the workforce don't match the perceived needs of employers, so there is both unemployment and difficulty hiring. A lot of engineers will tell you that companies are often expecting both too much (precise types of experience) and the wrong things (leetcode-type challenges, unnecessarily specific knowledge...), which leads them to pass over perfectly qualifie…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons : when "buyers" cannot distinguish between good and bad due to informational issues, even the good products (or in this case employees) cannot find buyers. Market failure.
It might be improvable by the relevant parties getting together and agreeing on a curriculum and exams so people only have to take a test once, for example. But I think that's a long way off.
Of course, ChatGPT makes this a lot worse since it reduces the cost of fakes on both sides: fake applications and fake job adverts.
Tinder for jobs. Swipe to interview.
Honestly, build it. The same thing which makes Tinder a blight on human happiness would make the format an excellent way to pair jobs with job seekers.
What really needs to happen is that we need to hire fast and fire fast. Stop it with the 7 rounds of interviews. Assume after some discussion and basic verification that the person isn’t lying about past experience. Hire the first candidate that passes your bar instead of interviewing and ranking 20 candidates. If it turns out that you have hired every tech employers worst nightmare, a person with great experience wh…
i also found that "verification" consists of "trick questions". if you can't answer the trick question, then people assume you are lying or a fraud. this doesn't work very well and optimizes for people able to answer trick questions and for those who get turned on asking these type of questions (i.e. people who are labeled "smart").
It's not any kind of paradox. Structural unemployment happens when the skills of the work force don't match the needs of employers, so there is both unemployment and difficulty hiring. Structural unemployment is usually high when there's a rapid change in demand for skills, as of course there is in tech. It results in crazy high salaries too. People with machine learning experience are getting 7-figure offers, while…
This sounds like a gross exaggeration. Unless they did something like start a company. For an IC at least, even at FAANG it would be bit crazy to start at more than ~$400k. If a project lead, then its obviously more and you can make bank as you move up the ladder.
What really needs to happen is that we need to hire fast and fire fast. Stop it with the 7 rounds of interviews. Assume after some discussion and basic verification that the person isn’t lying about past experience. Hire the first candidate that passes your bar instead of interviewing and ranking 20 candidates. If it turns out that you have hired every tech employers worst nightmare, a person with great experience wh…
This is a bit of an inhumane way of looking at it. Sure, it's "business", but asking someone to quit their current job to come work with you should only (IMO) be done if you have the intention of actually keeping them there and not "seeing how it works out"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a very large number of employers. If you want to convince me they're all unreasonable, you'll need to show me some pretty compelling evidence.
They're almost all cargo culting the same whiteboard algorithm hiring criteria for otherwise humdrum jobs so yeah, they're all kind of unreasonable. An HR fad can cause structural employment just as easily as bona fide requirements not being met.