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

What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 394 posts

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#291

Post by voidUpdate »

maybe_pablo wrote: post #289
voidUpdate wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I don't want to automate away the part of my job that I actually like doing? What if, in my job as a programmer, I actually want to do programming?

That’s fair. I do think, however, that the software industry may become a bit like the clothing industry: there will still be an artisanal market for people who want human-made software, but to be honest I wouldn’t expect it to remain the mainstream option.

Well I can say for sure I'd rather wear long lasting, tested (second hand), human made clothing rather than Shein Slop

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#292

Post by elicash »

bradleyy wrote: post #131

What if Financial Times has a vested interest in the real estate industry, and therefore wants RTO mandates? Something something AI I mean.

The FT columnist/reporter, primarily, is lifting up this paper https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6787638> as his newsworthy hook. But his conclusion is that "the evidence consistently shows hybrid arrangements get the best results." So I don't get the sense that he has a bias towards any specific outcome, given this kind of middle position.

And given he's the chief data reporter, it doesn't surprise me that he's looking at the academic work here.

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#293

Post by knollimar »

RHSeeger wrote: post #190
wqaatwt wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or.. they might have enjoyed their time at the office and want the new generation to have that experience as well: D

And both of them are wrong, because they _should_ be trying to figure out what works best for the person; not what worked best for _them_ and forcing it on the person.

Eh, there could be some people who prefer WFH but would benefit productively from RTO. It's about what as a policy is best, not for individuals.

I think the issue is when people conflate best for them with best ad policy

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#294

Post by e40 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #288
vineyardmike wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ZIRP alone isn’t even the full financial story - there was a time bomb tax change from a 2017 bill that impacted R&D (most software work) and that took effect in 2023. But it’s fairly visible that big companies (eg Meta) that are spending a lot on AI are actually changing spending on headcount and hiring to maintain margins. It’s not the efficiency of the workers, it’s the maintenance of margins with big new spending…

That tax change got reversed!

Proof? I don’t believe it did.

Edit: BBB? Is it in effect yet, though?

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#295

Post by qsera »

voidUpdate wrote: post #261
qsera wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who demand programmers start using LLMs in their work don't understand that it is essentially like asking programmers to start doing accounting or HR. Something fundamentally different from what they love to do..

Theyre asking programmers to become managers, asking another entity to do the work for them and check in every now and again to see how it's going

Actually they are asking programmers to become managers in addition to programmers. Because when the LLMs stops working, they are expected to take over.

So I think programmers who are asked to use LLMs should demand their job descriptions to be changed to that of managers, and should ever deny responsibility if the LLM stops to make progress. Thus let the organization be responsible to actually find a version of AI that works, just like how it was responsible to find competent programmers to work under the managers before.

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#296

Post by snapcaster »

qsera wrote: post #202
mgfist wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whatever LLMs are or are not, they've completely changed what I do for work. 9 months ago I was coding, today I prompt. Every line of code I commit is generated by LLMs. If you want to call it text search, be my guest. Doesn't change what it's done for the industry.

Sure, as I said, a better search can bring pretty dramatic change in how you work. > Every line of code I commit is generated by LLMs... Imagine if someone told you "Hey, this stackoverflow site is great. Everything I commit in my work is copy pasted from it!". What would you think about their work? Is that something worth bragging about?

i'm imagining this, and don't see how it has any relation to the discussion

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#298

Post by adabyron »

jdlyga wrote: post #143

The trouble with hiring juniors now is it's much more difficult to get them up to speed so they can be productive. Before covid, you'd sit next to them, get asked questions every so often, do some pair programming, and discuss ideas over lunch. You can, on paper, do the same exact things over Slack and Zoom. But there's much more friction. And a junior that's struggling is a lot less visible than it used to be. So wh…

I've found less friction in my experience. I prefer pair programming remotely over in person.

Pair Programming in person - one computer & one person looking over another's shoulder usually.

Pair Programming remotely - two computers & you can easily swap control of either's device or change who's sharing their screen.

The only thing working in an office wins on imo is building very close relationships with co-workers. I think physical presence is a human thing that cannot be beat. You can still build great relationships remotely but they're not the same. From the point of view of a company, remote relationships might be good enough or even better as they can prevent people becoming "to close" and ending up on the news at a concert together.

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#299

Post by maybe_pablo »

voidUpdate wrote: post #291
maybe_pablo wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s fair. I do think, however, that the software industry may become a bit like the clothing industry: there will still be an artisanal market for people who want human-made software, but to be honest I wouldn’t expect it to remain the mainstream option.

Well I can say for sure I'd rather wear long lasting, tested (second hand), human made clothing rather than Shein Slop

Sure, and I don’t disagree, but goods and services still need to scale to billions of people. Most people aren’t going to start knitting their own clothes, or have the time to, just like most companies probably won’t rely on fully hand-written software if cheaper automated alternatives are good enough. What you want or enjoy is one thing; the reality of society is another.

Re: What if remote working, not AI, is to blame for weak junior hiring?

#300

Post by PaulHoule »

e40 wrote: post #294
PaulHoule wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That tax change got reversed!

Proof? I don’t believe it did. Edit: BBB? Is it in effect yet, though?

See https://www.striketax.com/journal/section-174-amortization-r...
Post reply on HN