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

Being OK with not being extraordinary

tiffanymatthe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 396 posts

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#361

Post by j45 »

jrumbut wrote: post #97
j45 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An HR leader once shared with me: "Because every hire is a compromise between available candidates.. there is no perfect hire, and no two candidates are truly comparable." It's really an eye-opening statement for tech roles, and how formally taught and self-taught/transferred folks can work side by side successfully. The unique thing about tech skills is there's more than one valid way to solve a problem or do someth…

This is also why processes are often not transferable, because the people are different. Better leaders are always taking stock of what they have or don't have and reorienting the process rather than trying to stuff the new team into the old process.

Good point. The only way a process stands a chance is if it's person agnostic, which can introduce a different set of issues to navigate.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#362

Post by j45 »

triyambakam wrote: post #93
j45 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An HR leader once shared with me: "Because every hire is a compromise between available candidates.. there is no perfect hire, and no two candidates are truly comparable." It's really an eye-opening statement for tech roles, and how formally taught and self-taught/transferred folks can work side by side successfully. The unique thing about tech skills is there's more than one valid way to solve a problem or do someth…

In terms of concrete specifics, I've found having interviews with at least 3 engineers on the team you will potentially be working with to be really helpful for both sides to evaluate, and more specifically when the interviews are pair programming problem solving. You get to see how the candidate works through a problem and they don't have to code for an exact solution (or I don't think that should be the requirement…

Whiteboarding architecture/approach is in my mind as important, or more important than memorizing things for coding tests.

Clever architecture will almost always beat and outlast clever programming. Knowing how to best approach a problem is more than half the battle.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#364

Post by clevergadget »

zikzak wrote: post #139
coldtea wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I respect Scott Adams for his comic, but his blog is (in my opinion) a bunch of mass-produced rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings¹, trading out quality for (a very large) quantity Not so sure about the "rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings". He writes his opinions and gives arguments. Nothing "pseudo" about them, though they could still be (and often are) wrong, either factually or as a reasoning. > It's very unlikely…

I'll probably regret posting this at some point because Scott Adams is smart (just not particularly aligned with my own moral compass). I don't think he is AS smart as he thinks he is but that doesn't mean he isn't smart, it just means he has a particularly large ego. See, I predicted Trump would win as well. It seemed incredibly obvious to me despite it being the worst possible outcome I could imagine. I based my "p…

do you remember when he put a whole section at the end of The Dilbert Future that was basically The Secret? :D

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#366

Post by shoes_for_thee »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #237
shoes_for_thee wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.” Robert A. Heinlein

I would love to be able to do all those things. However, time is finite and so it's inevitable that you have to sacrifice some things.

Yeah, I don't know how to change a diaper.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#367

Post by richard_g »

mettamage wrote: post #126
syndacks wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How do you do leverage these strengths? What is your goal? I identify with the parent comment here, (the parent of that too) and feel like I've reached a point where the most obvious answer to your question (on leveraging strengths) is management. If you can code, project manage, and communicate effectively with [non]tech people and don't mind the stress of dealing with other people's issues, then it might be up you…

Say if that were true (as it might be), one doesn't just go into project management. There is no company who'd hire me as that as I have no prior experience in it.

When I was first starting out, one of my goals was to manage a team. I thought no one would hire me for that role since I didn't have the background for it.

Instead I started freelancing, got a few clients, and eventually hired others to help me.

Looking back, when I impressed clients with my work I was regularly offered various forms of management responsibilities. I probably could have found other opportunities like that if I had pursued it.

If you demonstrate good results in one of the main skills required for a job and explain how you would build up the others, you might be surprised at who would hire you.

People who can do well in several areas and effectively manage projects or other people are always in short supply.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#368

Post by richard_g »

pizza234 wrote: post #88
friday99 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I first heard that advice referenced from Scott Adams the creator of Dilbert. Where he notes that he is not a very good artist or very funny, but combining the two with his background in business is why he was successful. https://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/07/car...

I respect Scott Adams for his comic, but his blog is (in my opinion) a bunch of mass-produced rhetoric-pseudo-rational ramblings¹, trading out quality for (a very large) quantity. Scott Adams is definitely not famous because "he is an ok graphic artist and has an ok humor". He's famous because his satire was fairly unique and very sharp. I think he's very talented in the humor department; in addition to his creating…

I think that's his point?

If he drew like that but had no interesting content, no one would read the comics.

If he wrote jokes but couldn't illustrate them at even a basic level, they wouldn't reach many people.

And to be fair he could draw the absurd out of a semi-realistic situation, but he wasn't producing a treatise on modern management and how to run a business. You could find a lot of the same observations in water cooler chats at many workplaces.

He just made that really easy to consume and then got it in front of a lot of people. Which is probably a sign that he has a half decent understanding of distribution and promotion too. Once again he may not be a genius there but he knows enough to not screw up something good.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#369

Post by richard_g »

geebee wrote: post #359
ZainRiz wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 And as patio11 says, combining engineering with good writing skills makes it very easy to be one of the top with your combined skills I’ve been trying to lean more into that advice the past couple months by publishing on my blog :) Surprisingly enough, just this morning I woke up to realize someone had shared an article I wrote and it was on the HN front page! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24251068#24262190

It is a great combo, but you need to have a lot of personal initiative to make it work. Here's the thing - the typical software engineer interview doesn't assess writing(or many other valuable traits that can become unusually valuable when combined with good coding ability). Almost every one I've done has been a rehash of data structu res and algorithms along with a few other technical topics. Someone who is an excel…

There may not be a test of writing abilities in a job interview itself, but applying for the job is a test of writing abilities.

Re: Being OK with not being extraordinary

#370

Post by richard_g »

I used to struggle with this. It seemed like the first few steps of anything I could do would never measure up to these accomplishments that I saw from others.

Then I realized that even being willing to take those steps is extraordinary -- because it's not that common. Being willing to try and fail is extraordinary. Doing hard work without a guaranteed outcome is extraordinary. Realizing that you've been doing something ineffective and you need to change is extraordinary.

And if you consistently do at least some of those, then one day you may hit those extraordinary results when you least expect it. Even if you don't, you have had extraordinary experiences along the way. That's worth something.

Post reply on HN