We don't have senior engineers anymore • Hacker News Board

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#71

Post by neon_electro » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:23 PM UTC

weego wrote: post #62

Maybe I'll burn some Internet points here but How the computer works, from electrons to transistors, to CPU, assembly, and high-level programming languages. How the internet/network works, how you send some information from one computer to another, all OSI 7 Layers. Engineers who fixate on this kind of detail are useless to most businesses most of the time. If you structure everything on reducing, and value people on…

Can you elaborate on "within minutes of being asked"? Is "I need a few hours to chew on this" unacceptable?

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#72

Post by MattPalmer1086 » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

hurril wrote: post #48

boo-ga-ga wrote: post #18

Any article that splits people into two groups and says one group cannot inherently be good at something immediately puts me off, sorry.

I can definitely say that I am a mapper and not a packer. But I can also say that I am pretty much _all_ mapper and no packer. This means that it takes me forever to understand a lot of things that presumed packers (or more balanced individuals) would get in a jiffy. This is not intended as a humble brag! For the longest time on some projects I just don't f**ing get it, I start to feel dumb and in way: out of place.…

I'm similar. It takes me longer to get comfortable than others because it has to join up for me. It has been observed by many that I seem slow to get started on things.

Others seem to be happy taking snippets of stuff and just applying them straight away. But equally, they have not developed a deeper understanding and they will struggle when faced with edge cases. Pros and cons I guess.

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#73

Post by marcosdumay » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

xyzelement wrote: post #21

boo-ga-ga wrote: post #18

Any article that splits people into two groups and says one group cannot inherently be good at something immediately puts me off, sorry.

So you are saying there are those who split people into two groups and those two do not, and the first group is inherently bad at writing articles?

The problem is on assuming the groups are static.

The first group has been bad at writing articles up to now. That just doesn't tell you anything about what their next article will look up.

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#74

Post by romanhn » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

Raed667 wrote: post #7

Reminds me of a friend -who upon graduation- went from intern directly to "CTO" of a web agency. He was their 2nd developer and only engineer.

I mean, this is basically the author of this post :-)

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#75

Post by jnovek » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

romanhn wrote: post #59

I hate these kinds of articles, which come off as "I read about a bunch of these things and if you don't know all the same stuff, how dare you call yourself senior". I typically see this in mid-level engineers who haven't gotten humbled by experience yet. The premise is bogus - most people are a mix of mappers and packers, rather than landing squarely on one end. And you can absolutely be a wonderful senior without k…

I think “packing” and “mapping” describe real things that people do and I think it’s possible to lean in one direction or the other but the conclusion — that one is better than the other — doesn’t really follow for me.

I’m not very good at memorizing facts so I tend to “map” more than “pack”. I’ve worked with people who are far better packers than I am and they go from zero to shipping much faster than I do. Both skills are advantageous in the right situation.

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#76

Post by baz00 » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:25 PM UTC

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #55

baz00 wrote: post #40

I'm sure I'll get downvoted for this one, but can we stop using the word engineer in the commercial software and startup sector entirely. It's mostly hacking, fucked up things that make you cry, turds smeared all over stuff, religious factions fighting over faith (marketing) arguments and embarrassing catwalk fashion show bullshit. None of that is engineering . I'm only here because for some insane fucked up reason,…

What word do you propose we use instead? I feel like HR won’t feel too happy about advertising job openings for a „senior turd wrangler“.

Hey I'm a Principal Turd Wrangler. That's a very very accurate job title for me.

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#77

Post by protomolecule » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:26 PM UTC

bee_rider wrote: post #45

I don’t really get the first example. > Why do we need variables? > How variables are really stored? > The type of variables matter? These aren’t questions that a junior engineer couldn’t answer. These are questions that somebody who has passed a single programming class ought to be able to answer. Then they have questions about this vite platform, which I’ve never heard of, but it seems like they are asking “does so…

So why do we need variables?

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#78

Post by Gimpei » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

philosopher1234 wrote: post #39

xyzelement wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying there are those who split people into two groups and those two do not, and the first group is inherently bad at writing articles?

This is the flaw in having an entirely hateful view of splitting, that view is itself an example of splitting. You have to instead believe that there is a time where it is appropriate and useful to split (e.g, war) and times where it isn’t (general thinking)

This feels like a false equivalence. Splitting articles try to make broad generalizations about human behavior, but, as any social scientist knows, human behavior is extremely complicated and multidimensional. A critique of these articles is about falsity, which is binary.

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#79

Post by screwturner68 » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

Bluecobra wrote: post #28

mytailorisrich wrote: post #2

In all the companies I work for in the last 20 years "senior engineer" effectively meant someone with about 5 years of experience. In general the bar is low, indeed, and the title tends to be quite aggrandizing. The title that shows seniority ("been there, done that"), again in my experience, is the next one, which usually is "principal engineer".

It’s a bit of a shame that senior titles are being tossed out like candy now, while I had to work my ass off to get there. It took me 16 years, which feels about right to me. I switched my career from systems engineering to network engineering in 2010 so I might have gotten there sooner. (IT jobs for college grads in 2004 were few and far in between in my area and I had to take what I could get.)

I had the same title for 20 year Technical Consultant 3 and then I made the massive jump to TC4, every idiot that can log into Azure is now a Senior Sysadmin and if they can fumble their way through a Linux install they are the IT director (with 2 years of experience total). Titles in our industry aren't worth anything, I equate it to the startup with three employees and their titles are CEO, COO and COT....

Re: We don't have senior engineers anymore

#80

Post by Delk » Sun, Oct 01, 2023, 4:27 PM UTC

Raed667 wrote: post #29

tekla wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. They could be "Senior Developers" in the same way "Paramedics" are not "Doctors'

I come from a country where the title "engineer" is legally protected and needs to be issued by an accredited school. This had zero impact on software developers careers or salary, except if you wish to work for the government.

"Engineer" is a similarly protected title where I live as well. In my experience, software engineers and software developers without the engineer title seem to do exactly the same kind of work.