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

Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 117 posts

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#81

Post by PoachedSausage »

rosser wrote: post #71
PoachedSausage wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem we have is that fewer and fewer people are choosing to pursue hard engineering skills, partly because they're, well, hard and partly because soft skills seem to provide an equal or better living. I have nothing against philosophers, musicians and poets, I spent most of today being entertained by them on the radio, but without the hard skills the comforts of civilisation like running water, electricity and…

It's, again, anecdotal, and no small amount of confirmation bias, but I've been a technologist for over 20 years now. In all that time, most of my favorite technical colleagues, including their "hard" skills, were film majors, sociologists, historians, &c . You do not need a STEM degree to be an outstanding technologist, or even a competent one. Far and away, the most valuable skill for this kind of work is critical…

From what I have seen critical thinking, as a natural aptitude is quite rare. You can probably encourage it, but I doubt it can really be taught, even if those in authority wanted it.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#82

Post by rosser »

lhnz wrote: post #79
rosser wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not absolving anyone of anything, and I'm curious what I might have said to suggest I am. I've met far more, as you say, "social assholes", and been thrown under buses by them far more often than by technical folk, of whatever caliber socialization they had to offer.

> I'm not absolving anyone of anything, > and I'm curious what I might have said > to suggest I am. The whole 'hard and soft skills in tech' conversation depends on uncritically swallowing the belief that technically-minded people are naturally less empathetic. This perspective is utilised by people that want to raise their own position in relation. I'm not suggesting you're purposefully letting people off the hook -…

> The whole 'hard and soft skills in tech' conversation depends on uncritically swallowing the belief that technically-minded people are naturally less empathetic.

Well, sure. If that's a premise you bring to the discussion, your position makes sense. And to the extent it is, I reject it (as a generalization), too.

It's also, however, the first I've ever heard of its being a premise to the discussion, so I hope you'll understand why I wasn't discussing this as if it were.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#83

Post by quotemstr »

rosser wrote: post #77
quotemstr wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bridge designer imagining failure modes for a new bridge design isn't critical thinking, but the liberal arts autoethnography about the colonial etiology of Daft Punk, that's critical thinking? Reality is the opposite of your assertion: critical thinking is largely dead outside STEM, and that's because only in STEM does reality punish you for indulging sweet-sounding nonsense. I've also met good developers over t…

No, "critical thinking" is evaluating ideas and arguments, including one's own, for flaws. That you conflate it with engineering further suggests that you don't actually know what it is, and continue to over-value the "hard" skills beyond their (admittedly incredible and irreplaceable) worth. It also tells me we are utterly talking past one another here. I have better things to do with my afternoon than refute yet mo…

I'm sure the engineers reading your comment appreciate your suggestion that the many late nights they've spent finding flaws in their proposals and those of others were all some kind of fever dream.

It's amazing that the academic departments that talk up their critical thinking in the most produce nothing that resembles a workable theory of the world.

Maybe what you wrote was true at one time, but these days, "evaluating ideas...for flaws" in large parts of academia is the process of finding logical contortions that, in the death-of-the-author spirit, twist texts and make them say the opposite of what they say. It's essentially formalized trolling.

That mode of thought has no business getting into the same building as real engineering.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#84

Post by rosser »

quotemstr wrote: post #83
rosser wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, "critical thinking" is evaluating ideas and arguments, including one's own, for flaws. That you conflate it with engineering further suggests that you don't actually know what it is, and continue to over-value the "hard" skills beyond their (admittedly incredible and irreplaceable) worth. It also tells me we are utterly talking past one another here. I have better things to do with my afternoon than refute yet mo…

I'm sure the engineers reading your comment appreciate your suggestion that the many late nights they've spent finding flaws in their proposals and those of others were all some kind of fever dream. It's amazing that the academic departments that talk up their critical thinking in the most produce nothing that resembles a workable theory of the world. Maybe what you wrote was true at one time, but these days, "evalua…

> I'm sure the engineers reading your comment appreciate your suggestion they the many late nights they've spent finding flaws in their proposals and those of others were all some kind of fever dream.

> ...but these days, "evaluating ideas...for flaws" is the process of finding logical contortions that, in the death-of-the-author spirit, twist texts and make them say the opposite of what they say.

Wow.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#85

Post by cryptica »

quotemstr wrote: post #18

The recent trend toward replacing technical acumen with "soft skills" is disturbing. Let's dispense with a strawman: of course interacting with other people is necessary. But there are lots of people out there who said the "tech stuff" is easy and it's the coordination and empathy and stuff that's the real challenge. That's a dangerous perspective no matter which of the two ways you interpret it. One interpretation i…

Some of the best developers I know have bad soft skills and they have had trouble holding onto a steady job because of it. Being fired often makes them more bitter, less trusting and further damages their soft skills which turns into a vicious cycle.

Part of the problem is the increased intolerance to conflict in the workplace. Employees these days get fired for merely having self-respect and conviction.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#86

Post by quotemstr »

lhnz wrote: post #79
rosser wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not absolving anyone of anything, and I'm curious what I might have said to suggest I am. I've met far more, as you say, "social assholes", and been thrown under buses by them far more often than by technical folk, of whatever caliber socialization they had to offer.

> I'm not absolving anyone of anything, > and I'm curious what I might have said > to suggest I am. The whole 'hard and soft skills in tech' conversation depends on uncritically swallowing the belief that technically-minded people are naturally less empathetic. This perspective is utilised by people that want to raise their own position in relation. I'm not suggesting you're purposefully letting people off the hook -…

Absolutely right. Tech people have always been soft targets: just look at the awful nerdface of The Big Bang Theory. Most tech people are, in reality, just ordinary people doing what they love. While of course there are programmers who embody the "brilliant asshole" stereotype, there are managers who embody the Patrick Bateman and Bill Lumbergh stereotypes.

Let's agree to just treat people as people and stop with this idea, implicit the whole conversation, that we need to value people who aren't technical more because they automatically possess skills that these technical nerds lack.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#87

Post by [deleted] »

lhnz wrote: post #63
rosser wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're misconstruing my position. Yes, the rockstar asshole is rare, but I've worked with enough of them to know how destructive they are to the morale of the team. I was also once tasked with rewriting years of a rockstar asshole's code in months because said rockstar asshole left in a huff over not being treated the way he wanted, and no-one else had ever touched his deliberately impenetrable code. (All function an…

I don't think we disagree but I do think you're absolving the sins of social assholes because of the sins of asocial assholes. I've met rockstar asshole programmer's before, but I think it is overblown -- I do not think there are as many as everybody thinks there are. Far more often I've met great engineers that were well-rounded, kind and decent people. And yet the myth persists...

[deleted]

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#88

Post by [deleted] »

rosser wrote: post #84
quotemstr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure the engineers reading your comment appreciate your suggestion that the many late nights they've spent finding flaws in their proposals and those of others were all some kind of fever dream. It's amazing that the academic departments that talk up their critical thinking in the most produce nothing that resembles a workable theory of the world. Maybe what you wrote was true at one time, but these days, "evalua…

> I'm sure the engineers reading your comment appreciate your suggestion they the many late nights they've spent finding flaws in their proposals and those of others were all some kind of fever dream. > ...but these days, "evaluating ideas...for flaws" is the process of finding logical contortions that, in the death-of-the-author spirit, twist texts and make them say the opposite of what they say. Wow.

[deleted]

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#89

Post by mannykannot »

skybrian wrote: post #39
bjourne wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this. The argument I have heard a million times is that technical people can't understand non-technical people's (whatever "non-technical" mean, partitioning people as either technical/hard or non-technical/soft is dumb) perspectives. Therefore, for a product to succeed, it needs to be designed by non-technical people. But the assumption is wrong and letting non-technical people design products more ofte…

What's an example of a product that was badly designed because the product designer wasn't technical enough?

I don't think we have to choose between reasons for bad design - both causes being discussed here have occurred repeatedly - but since you asked, I would suggest that there have been many products with security failures arising from designers not having sufficient skill in that area.

Re: Hard and Soft Skills in Tech

#90

Post by mannykannot »

Is sound engineering judgement a technical skill or a soft skill? How about the ability to articulate that judgement, so as to explain to others that one set of choices is better than the alternatives, and persuade them to agree?
Post reply on HN