171–180 of 264 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Written with incredibly specific requirements that might as well have the name of the person they're retaining as one of them.
The ones at Amazon were super generic. SDE skills were supposedly "fungible."
I feel confident there are software jobs where it's essentially as specialized.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree with the attitude of the grandparent poster either, but work at a small company where I've been on the receiving end of many extremely low-effort applications from ineligible individuals, so it definitely goes both ways. Companies are also bombarded with spam from recruiters, just as candidates are.
Sure but what I'm saying is that the stakes for a company having to go through spam applications are significantly lower than the people trying to find a job who are getting spammed with dead ends while their savings drain lower and lower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've done tech interviewing for years. Job listing that are to various degree fake are quite common. Of course, fakeness comes in many flavor, from listings posted just to "see if there's anyone out there" (I had a boss who did this regularly) to jobs a supervisor really does want to fill but which they know they won't because the bureaucracy has forced impossible requirements on them. An example: "Junior programmer,…
Was your boss aware of the toll it takes to interview (well) on his own teams?
He was a friend of a friend and one of the most unprincipled people I've ever gotten to actually know. But I assume there are many similar people higher in corporate hierarchies that I wouldn't ever know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an outrage once you work at these companies and behold the sheer dysfunction and they're all getting paid wages native American citizens would take.
The model that Americans would take any job if the wages were high enough is simple but obviously false. For manual labor there's no amount of money you could pay Americans to be farmworkers. For desk jobs there's no amount that'll overcome Americans' cultural belief that you can't do math unless you were born as a special sort of person who is "good at math".
Ever worked a blast furnace? Or a coal mine?
You absolutely can pay enough money to get Americans to do really shitty manual labor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree with the attitude of the grandparent poster either, but work at a small company where I've been on the receiving end of many extremely low-effort applications from ineligible individuals, so it definitely goes both ways. Companies are also bombarded with spam from recruiters, just as candidates are.
yeah, but at worst, you waste time on the dime of a company from the recruiter's/hiring manager's POV. on the other side, you're wasting precious capital (time & money) from someone who may instead be hanging out with their kids, or taking care of their sick mother--i understand these are contrived examples. from a pure utalitarian perspective, both are a complete waste of time. but from a moral/ethical perspective,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea this is a weird one. Some job applications actually require me to fill in reference contact information. I can't submit the application without that detail. Of course, I try to skirt it. Is this normal?
I don't think I've ever encountered that in the U.S.
I would never fill that in, because I wouldn't want to bother my references. I know some of them don't really like doing it, but do it as a favour because we're on good terms. Probably not a rare scenario. I'm okay asking in a "if you provide me a reference, I will get a new job" as the final stage, but not as a "just checking in case I might land a job".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
lol and all those endless "we're hiring" Flexport ads, even after they did layoffs
It wasn't just them, but another dozen or so YC startups who've been around for many years and always keep a job ad in the queue. It's not their fault for doing that—it's my fault for neglecting the HN job ad system for too long. I get that the community doesn't like seeing the same ads over and over for the same few, long-established companies. We recently changed the HN /jobs page to gradually reduce the frequency…
If it helps, the system works great on an honor system. Have a community of passionate hackers, a site encouraging those hackers (some of which may be part of the community) to start up their own business and realize their ides, and the ad system would have good actors on both sides the pipeline. Interesting jobs for a community of passionate people.
I feel like that "honor" comes and goes with the economy though. Anything for an applicant to survive, anything for a job poster to make the company look good for investors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an outrage once you work at these companies and behold the sheer dysfunction and they're all getting paid wages native American citizens would take.
It's also an outrage how much leverage companies have over their H1B employees (especially from India, etc). If you have any long-term H1B coworkers from less-favored nations, I guarantee you there's a heartbreaking story they have to tell you if you ask. I work with a super high-performing guy with a Masters degree who has been at my company for 15 years and gets treated super poorly by the company. He still is prob…
At least it that way about a decade ago, as I’m realizing things might have changed since then
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's against the rules to call out hiring companies in the thread, primarily because we don't want off-topic arguments and because it would be too easy to exploit it for shenanigans. But since people have been increasingly saying that this is a problem, let's do something about it. My current thought is to add a new instruction at the top asking companies to please only post in the thread if they're committed to resp…
What if the new rule required a company to link to their last "who's hiring" posting if it was within, say, the last 3 months? That makes it easy, within HN, to see if a company is just doing copy/paste spam, or if they're posting new/updated info each month. It also has the advantage of being easily verifiable (and enforceable? not sure what the enforcement actions would be...) here on HN versus random anecdotes of…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree with the attitude of the grandparent poster either, but work at a small company where I've been on the receiving end of many extremely low-effort applications from ineligible individuals, so it definitely goes both ways. Companies are also bombarded with spam from recruiters, just as candidates are.
There would be less application spam if there were fewer spam job postings. Because only one in a hundred postings is real, we have to send out hundreds of applications before even getting a rejection. There's no way to tell if a posting is real or if anyone will ever read your application, so the only option available is to apply to everything. A lot of people pose this as a prisoner's dilemma, but it really is not.…
I disagree with this; in fact, I think there would be more application spam with fewer postings. Most of the application spam is from people who are either completely unqualified and just pressing the 'apply' button (which is made easy by websites which get paid per application), or people looking to move to a wealthier country (without any pre-qualification). I think both of these groups would actually be more aggressive about applying if they were more likely to be reviewed by a hiring manager.