741–750 of 778 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it means he fooled the interviewers
I don't think he "fooled the interviewers." The point of the story is that he focussed down on what the company's culture decided was important.
From the title I thought this post would be about something completely different. The post is about splitting the world into "good" and "bad" engineers with an emphasis on the bad engineer. Ok but what does that have to do with the middle class? The post leaves the best part out. What I thought the post would be about is the dissolution of the White Collar Kitchen Brigade The kitchen is run by the Chef but it needs t…
I think you and the author are arguing the same point. The middle class offer developer that’s unskilled is going to be on the chopping block. Let’s say that there’s a robot that can now be a sous chef. If you have a good sous chef, you might keep that person. If the sous chef poorly executed her role, the new robot sous chef is probably looking pretty good. Fundamentally this is an hollowing out of the middle class.…
And it's not just because the agents execute faster than humans, it's primarily that they have lower friction to onboard and off board. In the past we needed a "standing army" (salaried, full time work). Again this is not about the soldiers in the army being bad of incompetent, those are excuses. The real reason is that it takes a lot to train and maintain a soldier. Bu t when we now have ephemeral agents which spin up and down as needed, then there is going to be a strong incentive to cut down on the salaried middle class.
Simultaenously platforms like Mercor which offer white collar task based gig work are on the rise.
The logic is that ordinary humans are becoming too expensive to maintain on a standing basis.
> bad engineers were always a liability This part of the article hits home for me. With AI, "bad" engineers can now amplify their "bad" engineering x10 across the organization. The most egregious of these cases for me is often long tenured engineers who have lost interest in the craft, creating a dangerous combination of having enough merit to ship but not enough interest to make what they ship _good_. I am still a f…
I kind of think the whole "Learn to Code" push of the 2010s was one of the worst things that happened to our industry. Call me a gatekeeper if you want but, we ended up with a lot of people that just can't do the job. The problem is our industry mostly doesn't have any sort of reasonable mentorship or apprenticeship culture, so we've always left it to the engineers to teach themselves. Sink or swim. The problem is th…
> bad engineers were always a liability This part of the article hits home for me. With AI, "bad" engineers can now amplify their "bad" engineering x10 across the organization. The most egregious of these cases for me is often long tenured engineers who have lost interest in the craft, creating a dangerous combination of having enough merit to ship but not enough interest to make what they ship _good_. I am still a f…
It's actually this that leaves me feeling optimistic. We're definitely bad at this today, but will we always be bad at this into the foreseeable future? I'd like to think not. I'd like to think that we'll get better at working with agents in the future and eventually develop better practices around this new weird technology once it's better understood.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A colleague of mine came to me for advice. He wanted one of those high dollar jobs at a well-known MegaCorp. He knew a leetcode test was used by them. I suggested that his top priority was to study the leetcode books for the next 3 weeks. I told him those three weeks would be the best ROI he'd ever make. He did so. He aced the test. He got the job with a huge offer. He agreed that the ROI was out of the park! P.S. I'…
Doesn't this imply that, had your friend not taken your advice, he would have failed and thus been an "obvious fraud", but a mere 3 weeks transformed him from fraud to competent programmer?
Also, if someone is unwilling to do the work to pass the leetcode test, they likely don't have the ambition to get the high pressure jobs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think he "fooled the interviewers." The point of the story is that he focussed down on what the company's culture decided was important.
That's the point we all see, but from context, the story teller apparently thought it shows that leetcode is an effective way to filter frauds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think he "fooled the interviewers." The point of the story is that he focussed down on what the company's culture decided was important.
It's like cramming for an exam. Yes you can get enough information in your short term memory to pass, even do well. But a year later (or a month) it's all gone. You never really knew it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A colleague of mine came to me for advice. He wanted one of those high dollar jobs at a well-known MegaCorp. He knew a leetcode test was used by them. I suggested that his top priority was to study the leetcode books for the next 3 weeks. I told him those three weeks would be the best ROI he'd ever make. He did so. He aced the test. He got the job with a huge offer. He agreed that the ROI was out of the park! P.S. I'…
I'm confused. Your example contradicts your point. How is it a good filter for fraud if it can be aced by only studying for 3 weeks?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> an expensive interview process where the candidate has to be onsite I'm sorry, but if I'm doing the hiring, the person who isn't willing to come on site to do an interview will be one of the first people off the list to hire (I mean, unless it is a remote job, and the person is nowhere near the employer, obvious exceptions would apply). In-person interviewing can be extremely valuable. Will it filter out every bad…
> I'm sorry, but if I'm doing the hiring, the person who isn't willing to come on site to do an interview will be one of the first people off the list to hire Nobody said anything about not coming on site. That's how we used to do it, in the ancient pre-history of 2019. What I said was that if you bring someone on site only to leetcode them , you deserve not to hire anyone. The downside, of course, is that you don't…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What advantage do you, the consumer, see to licensing over certification?
Liability for the professional that knows if they botch a job in horrendous fashion that they could lose the ability to continue practicing their profession.
But it's not certain you would even be able to continue to do the job if you botched things in a horrendous fashion. There is precedent for individuals being barred from working in certain industries if it is considered necessary to protect the public, even when those industries are unlicensed. Granted, it is rare and a lot more complicated than where licenses are found, but if you've botched things in a horrendous fashion anything is possible.