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

We only hire the trendiest

danluu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 728 posts

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#81

Post by ljw1001 »

dkopi wrote: post #14
pingec wrote: post #9

Is the anti windows/.NET bias really that common? I have been a .NET dev for 6 years because that was my job. But I don`t believe that makes me useless on any other stack. In fact lately I desire to work on something that feels exciting and fresh again but sometimes I feel like .NET devs are looked down upon and it`s not so easy to land a job or contract outside .Net land.

I wouldn't say it's an "Anti .NET" bias, as much as it's an "anti too many years in the same exact thing" bias. 1. Choose a different language for your next side project. 2. Step in the door with C#, try to help out on projects or change positions inside the company. 3. Attend hackathons, contribute to opensource projects. A good programmer can quickly feel comfortable in any programming language. Recruiters feel mor…

I don't mean to be hurtful, but you sound like you've exactly the same biases the original post is about, and you're rationalizing. Seriously, not all good hackers fit any cookie-cutter definition of a hacker.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#82

Post by ljw1001 »

gizmorious wrote: post #62

I completely agree with the article. I worked for EC2 for >3 years and consistently exceeded team expectations. I'd get pinged by recruiters all the time while at Amazon. Now that I work for smallish not-for-profit, no recruiter seems to be interested any more. What's interesting is that I'm more active in OSS projects, have far more experience than I had when I left Amazon. Totally weird!

consider adjusting your resume. could just be presentation. :)

Specifically, if it doesn't say AWS in the first sentence, you're doing it wrong.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#83

Post by dan_b »

UK-AL wrote: post #60
s_kilk wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These are developers that can make code work, but take Visual Studio away from them and they cease to be developers. Ha, during my brief stint at a windows-shop after graduating, I did meet a few who couldn't get their heads around the concept of having a build happen without someone clicking a green triangle button in VS.

Considering the .NET stack has a heavy bias towards CI, that's hard to believe.

You'd be surprised. There's a lot of shops out there who have never heard of CI/CD/Automated Tests/etc.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#84

Post by bsdpython »

I don't like it but I do understand it from the employers perspective. Most hiring is done to avoid risk. Went to a top school, working at a popular company and already using the tech we use? Come in for an interview. Missing one of the three? We'll phone screen. Missing two out of the three? Not worth my time.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#85

Post by ljw1001 »

A lot of companies founded by young people, hire other young people and believe the best tech is what they learned in college: Command-line python, javascript. They don't realize that teachers teach python because it's easy to teach, rather than because it's the best language for the real world, or that tools make people more productive in the real world (where they can be afforded).

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#86

Post by hackmeister »

mikro2nd wrote: post #30
LAMike wrote: post #6

What does a "trendy" resume look like in 2016?

If you have a resume you're not "trendy". You're "trendy" if you have a github account full of projects in Go and Node-y stuff, a twitter-stream with a few thousand followers, some medium rants and (maybe) a linked-in profile. eta: ... and 10k+ karma on HN and SO ;)

10k+ karma on HN (or a high klout score) = 0 productivity ;)

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#87

Post by sqldba »

majewsky wrote: post #48
cplat wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they prefer using uncool tools intelligently to solve a complex problem; rather than using the next cool thing dumbly that creates more problems than it solves.

Exactly. More than once I've written a small shell script to do things that other people do in multiple KLOC of Go or NodeJS.

When I quit my prior job, they started a multi-month project to replace all of my PowerShell with "proper" C#.

Then they decided it was too hard, threw it all away, and just decommissioned parts of the application and run everything else manually.

Working under brilliant minds like that you can see why I quit.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#88

Post by x1024 »

ljw1001 wrote: post #85

A lot of companies founded by young people, hire other young people and believe the best tech is what they learned in college: Command-line python, javascript. They don't realize that teachers teach python because it's easy to teach, rather than because it's the best language for the real world, or that tools make people more productive in the real world (where they can be afforded).

Hell, at this point I'd be happy with "command-line python". I've seen a few-too-many "Rails, but only in RubyMine" devs.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#89

Post by x1024 »

bsdpython wrote: post #84

I don't like it but I do understand it from the employers perspective. Most hiring is done to avoid risk. Went to a top school, working at a popular company and already using the tech we use? Come in for an interview. Missing one of the three? We'll phone screen. Missing two out of the three? Not worth my time.

The OP's point is that "This only works if you pay the appropriate amount". If you go with that process, but discard the "money" variable, you'll only interview the people who got rejected from every one of the well-paying companies.

Re: We only hire the trendiest

#90

Post by bsdpython »

x1024 wrote: post #89
bsdpython wrote: post #84

I don't like it but I do understand it from the employers perspective. Most hiring is done to avoid risk. Went to a top school, working at a popular company and already using the tech we use? Come in for an interview. Missing one of the three? We'll phone screen. Missing two out of the three? Not worth my time.

The OP's point is that "This only works if you pay the appropriate amount". If you go with that process, but discard the "money" variable, you'll only interview the people who got rejected from every one of the well-paying companies.

I read the article why do you feel the need to summarize a part of it? Geez.
Post reply on HN