671–680 of 728 posts
You can replace "trendy" with "good cultural fit" in many places. Cultural fit is arguably the most important factor in hiring someone. From my network, I see a hugely different culture at Microsoft and Google. Just saying.
except "culture fit" is usually a code word for a 25 year old white guy who walks and talks like me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi. I definitely wasted time interviewing underqualified people. But I wasted time interviewing some overqualified people too (because of salary/location expectations that should have been communicated up front). Actually, all of interviewing feels like wasted time (you have this burning need, and you want to fill it yesterday, or better yet a month ago, and yet you have to go through this process and learn about all…
>But I wasted time interviewing some overqualified people too (because of salary/location expectations that should have been communicated up front). Well that's your own fault as the job advertiser, and when I say "you", I mean almost all companies that advertise jobs. You almost never state the salaries to be paid, so tons of peoples' time gets wasted by pointless interviewing which gets followed up with insultingly…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many nations where the posted price is not the actual price, and haggling is expected and normal, even on something as mundane as groceries. Without exception, these nations are backwards and economic disasters. There's a reason for that That's a big claim that you make very authoritatively. You should back it up, or change your wording to better express that you're making a hypothesis without much evidence…
Well as for some prominent examples haggling is considered bad form for small transactions in the nordic countries and they do kind of well. All the places I go to that have a culture of haggling seems to be way worse off. I guess others can provide more data points that points in this direction but I'd also appreciate counterexamples.
What solipsism is objecting to ("big claim"/"hypothesis") is the statement "There's a reason for that", which implies that there's a causal relationship between the prevalence of haggling and countries being "backwards and economic disasters" (for which there's been no evidence provided).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But I wasted time interviewing some overqualified people too (because of salary/location expectations that should have been communicated up front). Well that's your own fault as the job advertiser, and when I say "you", I mean almost all companies that advertise jobs. You almost never state the salaries to be paid, so tons of peoples' time gets wasted by pointless interviewing which gets followed up with insultingly…
Why should the company lead with what they are willing to pay? Why is it on the company and not the possible employee? Why shouldn't every phone screen begin with the possible employee saying "this is my salary range" and politely exiting the call if the screener won't validate that the salary offered is within that range? When I buy a car, the person selling the car sets the price. I can take it or leave it. When I…
The candidate can show the ability to do whatever work the company may require, but if that work does not increase revenues in some way, it will not be able to keep the worker employed indefinitely. Obviously, there's a lot of room for speculation here.
The worker has a general idea of the average amount that many other companies might expect to value the work of similar workers. So the prospective employer has to signal that it can monetize the work more effectively than the median company to attract better than the median quality of candidate.
If your company is building yet another CRUD business app, you do not need above-median skills, nor could you afford them. If your company is building a new, Wall-Street-killing trading platform, you need the 99th percentile of skilled workers, and should therefore be offering 99th percentile pay, because the work will eventually be worth billions of dollars.
The candidate knows how much their labor is worth on the open market. If the prospective employer does not know how much the open position's work will be worth to the company, it really shouldn't be trying to fill it until it does know. If you want to reach the higher-quality candidates, you have to send a clear signal that they will not be rejected for wanting too much money, which happens all too often with companies that need to pinch their pennies or extend their runway.
There are companies out there that will hang up the phone if you say $100k. And there are also companies out there that will struggle to hold their poker face at being offered such a great discount on an employee. You won't necessarily be able to determine which is which before you apply.
When the company does not say up front, it is implicitly saying "we will pay you exactly what you are worth, as determined by negotiation, with no predetermined limits." If they wait until halfway through the second phone screen to bring it up, and then say, "that's more than we can pay", they are wasting the candidates' time.
That is why the company should lead with their salary maximum.
The analogy is not a fixed price on fungible goods in commerce. The candidate has a unique artwork, to be sold at auction. The auction house would very much like to establish that potential bidders have at least enough money on hand to meet the prospective employee's reserve price before giving any of them paddles, especially when the bidding procedure can last several weeks per bid. The candidate does not want the reserve to be known, as they would prefer to get a higher price. Likewise, the prospective employers do not want their maximum bids to be known to their competition. But as they can only complete the purchase by making the highest bid anyway, their wishes do not matter one little bit. You have no business bidding on a Van Gogh painting with only $5k in your pocket, looking for something nice to hang up in a hotel room.
The employer is the one that makes the offer. They are selling the pile of cash, and the employee either buys it with their labor, or leaves the offer on the table.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If I want to be less charitable, the demand for hours and hours of preparation is just (further) hazing to prove dedication. Come to reddit's /r/cscareerquestions one day. Tons of stressed out 18-22 year olds practicing CTCI and LeetCode for hours just for a chance at passing the Facebook/Google hazing. Because these people are usually "high achievers" who spent hours in high school at SAT preps, this feels natural…
I don't really see the issue with that. The benefits ($45-$51/hr internship salary or $110K+ starting) *outweigh the cost of preparation.
I do have a problem with it when it's for smaller companies that get 0.05% the number of applicants though!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everyone wants to be your friend, but everyone SHOULD want to work together towards a common goal. The trick is in getting the two parties involved to see that common goal and why it's in their own best interests. It sounds like the person you're talking about was using the conversation not as a way to acquire help, but rather to demonstrate that he didn't need it, probably in an effort to boost his own status in…
That's definately true. The problem is figuring out how to avoid situations like that without hesitating to speak up around people you don't know well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But I wasted time interviewing some overqualified people too (because of salary/location expectations that should have been communicated up front). Well that's your own fault as the job advertiser, and when I say "you", I mean almost all companies that advertise jobs. You almost never state the salaries to be paid, so tons of peoples' time gets wasted by pointless interviewing which gets followed up with insultingly…
Are you the Grishnakh from RoD?
I'm the Grishnakh who used to be an orc captain but was stepped on by an Ent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, trying to get people to use NuGet is like pulling teeth. When OSS dependencies are considered cromulent, vendoring, sometimes just straight-up binary vendoring , has been my experience with .NET shops. Those are the above-average places, though--I've seen a ton of reticence around using anything with an OSS license. Coming from a Mono background, this was very weird to me.
I think the conclusion we can draw from this discussion is that dismissing Microsoft-stack developers is a terrible generalization.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to DLL Hell ;) The thing I didn't get (and still don't fully appreciate) is the power of bash - you can write almost-serious code in this! And some of the standard CLI utilities (stand up awk) are like pocket universes of depth and complexity. Windows probably has a lot of the same stuff, I hear good things about PowerScript, but it's not so standard to use it as a code monkey. I miss Visual Studio sometimes.…
> The mess of terminal windows and text editors that I code in now is frustrating at times. Just use emacs for everything! It runs in X, it runs in a TTY, it runs everywhere. My own stack is st[1], tmux & emacs, with Firefox as my browser, within a tiling window manager. I have a single terminal open at any point in time, with tmux multiplexing the sessions. I use C-z as the tmux escape key, because it's easy to type…
I recommend eshell
Also, I had a nice comfy savings account, so I decided not to work for 6 months while I focused on me-time and learning NewTechnologyStack. I fell in love with it, and havent looked at OldTechnologyStack since. I wrote many demo apps, started making open source contribs, and engaged with NewTechStack communities online. Damn that was fun! I joined local meetup groups and other communities to fill my sponge-like passion for NewTechStack to the max.
Let me also state that with OldTechStack, I never, ever had a problem finding a job - really, it usually takes me about a week to land a new job somewhere else in my bustling tech-hub city. My resume with OldTechStack was, well, very trendy. I could often tell in interviews that people were going to hire me based on my resume before they even spoke to me in person, and that the in-person resume was just to reassure themselves that I wasnt bullshitting them. Dont get me wrong, Im a great programmer, but I know I was hired because my resume was nice 'n trendy (with the OldTechStack culture).
So, once I started looking for jobs in NewTechStack culture, the reality of the superficial hiring process really set in. Firstly, NewTechStack people have a cultural internalization that OldTechStack really sucks. Mind you, I am not referring to technical folk, but HR people, recruiters, entrepreneurial types, etc. Secondly, I had no idea that taking time off from work made me look really bad to most folks at the base level of recruitment. Because I was not currently employed, I was not making it past many screening interviews. Thirdly, there was this magic phrase, "x many years of PRODUCTION experience in NewTechnologyStack..." that was really screwing me over. Despite the fact that I am proficient in 4-5 major programming languages, and have experience in several more. Despite the fact that I have lots of demonstrable work, both public open source, and my own creations (living at live URLs). Despite that my career experience has given me challenges that are scaled many-powers-of-ten beyond what your rinky-dink logistics app's customers demand. Despite that I interview wonderfully, am willing to do programming challenges for free, and usually deliver above and beyond expectations... Despite basically being a wonderful candidate from your engineering team's perspective, I found myself being rejected for these and many other superficial reasons.
Right now I am elated that none of those companies hired me, as I found my way via freelance contracts, and my life could not possibly be more well balanced and I have never been happier in my career. Right now I also work on about 7 different NewTechnologyStack production websites with relatively complex e-commerce and marketplace challenges, as again, I handle generalism well, and well adopt AnyTechnologyStack much better than your "senior dev" with a whopping "5 years production experience."
Guess what? Every single company that I interviewed with about 9 months ago is still hiring for the same damned position I applied for. Some of them have even reached out to me on StackOverFlow or other career sites, like a zombie, unknowing that theyve already interviewed this candidate...
Why?
Because theyre obsessed with an irrational, non-science based, peacock-dance, superficial standard for hiring people, specifically with standards they are not at all knowledgeable of, that they somehow believe will lead them to "hiring the best" and becoming the next Google (with their rinky-dink logistics app with about 4K customers).
I am not suggesting some "science based" checklist system take its place. I do think the peacock-dance, and other completely inauthentic behavioral checks, need to be removed from evaluation. Dont get me started on all the dinosaurs still relying on "technical tests" that throw college-level abstract puzzle games at you, which have been scientifically proven to produce false positives as well as false negatives.
Pro tip: copy and paste documentation from YourTechnologyStack official site to your blog, write one sentence saying, "please leave a comment below!" and youre instantly more hireable (to recruiters at the screening level) because, well, youre a blogger, and youre clearly engaged in the community.
Companies are so obsessed with "hiring the best" that they basically buy a "hiring kit 'n a box" and hope it automates itself, when all theyre doing is creating an absurd gauntlet that rejects lots of great candidates, and leaves them without any hired candidates 6 months later. The "rockstar" programmer, mythical though she/he may be, is still the goose that lays the golden egg and turns your company into NextGoogle.
The level of absurdity with the hiring process as a software engineer is obscene. For people who spend most of their professional time dwelling in thought-realms of pure logic, getting hired is a maddeningly illogical process.