Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We will never have enough software developers (2020)

whoisnnamdi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 553 posts

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#231

Post by teucris »

Guid_NewGuid wrote: post #181
rootusrootus wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That definitely sounds broken. I have a hard rule with my PO: 30% of the sprint is mine (read: the team's). He only gets to schedule 70% of the stories according to his priorities. I use that 30% for tech debt, primarily, but sometimes for spike projects and other things that interest us.

It sounds like SOC2 compliance requirements unfortunately. Plus process overhead on who can raise tickets. I've found compliance makes it harder to write good code. If you get a PR approval with optional suggestions you're heavily disincentivised from actually addressing those comments since if you push those changes you now need to wait for review again. Like everything process and compliance it's designed by low-co…

As a product manager I appreciate this take. Lots of bureaucracy is caused by a few base requirements for compliance/governance required by laws or customer need. It’s a huge time suck for PM and engineering, but I don’t know if this is avoidable. Maybe more automated verification systems?

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#232

Post by fmakunbound »

An ass-clown engineering director/manager I had, proudly shared a chart – I guess it was from something related to the post - that at the current rate, everyone in the US will need to be a SWE at Amazon for it to continue to grow. I can't tell if that case is true or not and I don't remember the time frame, but I have a suspicion SWEs will instead have to work smarter with better tools and languages that effort "multipliers". x10 languages, and tools perhaps.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#233

Post by gunfighthacksaw »

fileeditview wrote: post #141
Gigachad wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do not need a 5+ year degree. I have no formal qualifications and have no issue securing six figure jobs. And I have seen many others do the same. You also have the ability to get a standing desk and take breaks to walk around.

Yea so maybe that degree thing is a German problem. I do not know the other markets/countries. Here, what I said is certainly true. A standing desk is better than no standing desk but won't correct everything by itself. Taking a break and walking around is fine but I still need to get back to staring into the computer screen to do my work. I don't know your age but for me it started with about ~35 that I realized tha…

After 1 year of SWE, I realized my body was becoming frail and mushy relative to when I was slugging cast iron fittings in the warehouse. Took me about 2 weeks to put together a workout regime with built in progression.

One of the things I’m glad of is the flex time and working from home so I can crank out workouts whenever it suits me.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#234

Post by jayd16 »

JackMorgan wrote: post #5

A fascinating premise, and matches what I saw as an engineering director. The best just get bored and move on. I think many teams are unaware how much extra value is possible by retaining existing employees vs hiring new ones. Each year I'd try to make sure I was "making them an offer they couldn't refuse" with new interesting challenges, new tech, plenty of personal research time, as much pay increase as I could pos…

>The best just get bored and move on.

Is that the premise? Seems to be saying that constantly changing skills exhausts developers to the point that it becomes more lucrative to work in another profession.

Although, I suppose learning new things just to tread water can be boring too.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#235

Post by Patrol8394 »

whimsicalism wrote: post #210
rootusrootus wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely think "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.

Personally I do because I enjoy working with very smart people. The backlash against leetcode is the same as backlash against other types of tests: most people are going to fail and most people don't like failing, so they blame the test.

leetcode == smart ? oO that's new

I interview many candidates at FAANG, I can easily tell the ones that have prep by just doing leetcode and the ones that knows the shit.

I couldn't care less if you can solve all kinds of complex dynamic programming challenges.

I ask coding questions that you won't find in leetcode and requires problem solving skill and good craft.

And this is because I do like working with smart people and not with people good at memorizing patterns.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#236

Post by weatherlite »

rainboOow9 wrote: post #135
BlargMcLarg wrote: post #12

>High-ability workers are faster learners, in all jobs. However, the relative return to ability is higher in careers that change less, because learning gains accumulate. This is not the only reason for the quick learner -> high dropout thing. By the article's definition, I'd be a "fast learner". Most of the industry expects me to come in already knowing what they want me to know, while most ways to obtain said knowle…

This is spot on, and personally, the main reason why I decided to move to an engineering manager after 10 years as a developer. And even as an engineering manager, I do not feel safe. I think only once you reach director level, you are protected from market hype and newest frameworks trends.

You think directors feel safe? I highly doubt it...

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#237

Post by Patrol8394 »

adamsmith143 wrote: post #169
rootusrootus wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely think "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.

http://they.whiteboarded.me/companies-that-dont-whiteboard.h...

I am not sure if this is kept up to date. I did interview at DoorDash and they definitely do leetcode style interview.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#238

Post by woeirua »

whimsicalism wrote: post #210
rootusrootus wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely think "we do not do leetcode interviews" and maybe "we only have three interviews total" would be selling points on a job posting. People who are experienced in the field don't want to go through the same hoops that newbies do just to prove they know how to write basic algorithms.

Personally I do because I enjoy working with very smart people. The backlash against leetcode is the same as backlash against other types of tests: most people are going to fail and most people don't like failing, so they blame the test.

I guess Sergey and Larry weren't "smart" then because they never went through a leetcode interview.

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#239

Post by Beltalowda »

pantulis wrote: post #195
adriand wrote: post #81

I feel like the need to continuously learn new things is a feature of the profession, not a bug. It is certainly a difficult challenge, but I've always felt that the most important trait in a software developer is an eagerness to learn new things. I think the overall premise of the article makes sense, but where I differ from the writer is in how I view the need for constant learning and self-development. The author…

> I feel like the need to continuously learn new things is a feature of the profession, not a bug. The bug is in our brains. After two decades, you are not the fast learner you were, especially after you manage to fill your clothes with keys traded for responsibilities. Realizing that is a source of mid-life crisis. Trust me, I've been there.

Also: you're learning the same thing you already learned several times before, except slightly different this time. Things are no longer as exciting as when you learned it the first time, and especially if $new_thing isn't a fundamental improvement over $old_thing, or even worse (in your view, whether that view is correct is another matter) it just becomes a slog.

I found that excitement/motivation is pretty important in actually learning new things. I'm close to 40 now and don't find it's harder to pick up new things when I'm motivated. If anything, I find it easier as I have a broader background knowledge and spend my time more effectively – I didn't believe my teachers when they told me that taking notes helps you remember stuff but they were right and I was a stubborn idiot. All of that offsets the undoubtedly decreased ability of my brain compared to when I was 21. It's just that I've done a lot of things before and find it hard to motivate myself for "$new_thing that's fundamentally just like $old_thing building $new_app that's not really any different from $old_app".

Re: We will never have enough software developers (2020)

#240

Post by goldenshale »

I think this article hits on some truths and gets a handful of things wrong. First, they are correct that we are in a dynamic profession that requires constant learning and expanding. No doubt the people who choose to stay in software are likely to be people who are curious, life-long learners where this is a benefit of the profession rather than a drawback. That said, one thing I noticed from teaching computer science while a graduate student is that the poor students think about languages and libraries as key skills, while the better students think about the data structures, algorithms, and design principles. These slightly more meta-level concepts are far more stable and timeless, while the underlying implementations of them are constantly evolving. If you think of each new library as "having to learn a new skill" I can imagine burnout and overload are more likely, but if you figure once you know 3D graphics you can pretty easily pickup any new graphics engine, then it might even seem fun to explore different takes on the same old concepts. It's like hearing a new band in your favorite genre.

As for attributing burnout as the core issue here, I would strongly disagree with this idea. When teaching undergrads I noticed immediately that a good portion of each student cohort was basically there because they were interested in making money in the future rather than exploring the ideas of computer science. They were no doubt going to get frustrated or bored and move into management or some other profession rather than continue to expand as an engineer. This is totally fine, and they are probably richer for having learned what they did, but I don't know why we can't just see this and appreciate it for what it is rather than portraying it as the drama of burnout.

Post reply on HN