It can be any part. Usually, the problem is that companies find out that I'm not good as a cog in a machine. That can happen at any time, but once they do, they're not interested.

> Usually, the problem is that companies find out that I'm not good as a cog in a machine

IMO this is the real problem - and it comes through in your blog posts. It's very risky to hire someone who can't be a cog, you need a lot of social proof that they're worth the risk.

There is being a mindless cog, and honestly, at the extremes, nobody eants that except for the most mindless, easiest manual jobs. And there is being a professional who does his job as part of a team, follows some basic rules and still speaks his mind, but also knows when it just doesn't do any good. Try being the second, because at the other extreme of the mindless drone (which people are forcedbto be and hardly are by choice) is being a contrarian know-all who is just impossible to work with.

Edit: From what others wrote about about your blogs, I think your ascertion that your personal views shouldn't pose a proboem are wrong. By that I don't mean having them is wrong, but being as outspoken about, lets put it mildly, potentionally controversial opinions in a borderline aggressive way is the problem. It would be an equal problem if we talked veganism as another, potentionally bad, example. Nobody wants to be called out by their co-worker during lunch for having a steak everytime. And nobody wants to talk about why a co-worker feels insulted for not being ablento bring a gun to the workplace.

Edit 2: Paul Graham has one of his earlier articles that seems relevant: the one about keeping a low public profile. Is more relevant than ever, the more said profile deviates from the mainstream the more it can become a problem. GP is great example for this.

I went shooting with previous colleagues. They carried guns to the workplace too.

Something is deeply wrong with the USA, like truely and deeply wrong.

Eh, this guy doesn't speak for us.

What does that actually mean? The fact you're using language like, "cog in the machine" is already telling me a lot about why companies don't want to hire you. If you told us exactly where the process breaks down for you and why with illustrative examples, we might be able to help you identify where it's going wrong for you. But tip 1, companies hire people who are positive about how they can contribute and work within an org.

Literally came here for the same thing. Went to their blog and saw that a programming language is "dead to [them]" because the organization behind the language doesn't like guns. WUT

> "Why can't I get a job?"

> - man with 30ft pole behind them with a red flag hoisted on it

I never asked why I can't get a job. I merely said that I can't. I know I'm not a good fit in sterile workplaces.

There might be people outside of the conference targeting attendees.

Let me be completely clear with you: you are the danger to others when you bring a concealed firearm to a conference.

There might be people outside of the conference targeting attendees? That is the talk of someone who walks around life haunted by fear.

No, it's the talk of someone who lived in a dangerous neighborhood.

And you’re still carrying the trauma with you

Sorry for not looking at your credentials, do you have enough experience to potential land staff+ roles? Would still be a cog but maybe a bit more breathing room depending on the type of role you apply for.

https://staffeng.com/book has a list of different types of staff+ roles that could maybe fit.

I don't think I have enough work experience. But thank you for the link.

So you can't get a job that you want, but you could get a job that you don't want (software dev cog)

But to get a job, at least for most positions, is exactly to be a cog in a machine.

Yeah, this is usually a killer in interviews. You can be super smart, know what you're taking about... but if you're not willing to "play the game" you're going to go nowhere.

I'm Australian based, probably similar elsewhere.

You seem like a super intelligent guy in regards to your profession, though (and perhaps it is my own bias) also super contrarian. I'd genuinely always pick the person who is easy to work with than someone who might cause conflict - even if the latter was way smarter. Collaboration is key in teams.

This is what it boils down to. The combination of competent and contrarian often becomes extremely toxic for the workplace.

This is 100% true in basically any case of bigger than startup orgs - you don't desperately need that superstar 10x or 100x coder if he is pain to work with, creates code full of abstractions that are then hard to maintain for rest of the team or even worse, like potential security problem (looking into OP for 2 mins I already know he is rather hardcore christian, maybe a bit gun nut, antivaxxer/anti-mask, has long history of anxiety and other health issues). All sums up into 'probably difficult to work with'.

This would be a problem for me when hiring too (to be frank - hard pass due to above, and no amount of git code beauty would change that).

Collaboration, communication, team work are much more important long term in bigger teams. Willingness to help team/project even though sometimes bureaucracy might be Kafka-esque. Yes we are all cogs in big machine, so what? It takes 2 seconds to realize that for each of us. We still do the work, its work for christ sake, we pay the bills, vacations and go back to our families just like everybody else.

I never said that companies weren't right to not hire me.

I personally think I'm just not a good for anywhere.

Looking at your blog, I think you're such a specialist that it's going to be hard to find a good fit. (For example, only being willing to write code in C.) Most people are more flexible.

Oh, I know. I never wondered why. I merely said that I can't get a job to refute the article.

You can get a job. You've made it clear that you know what you need to do to get a job (be more flexible with the language you'll work in, remove all non-technical opinions from your blog, and for the love of god stop carrying a fucking gun with you everywhere)

If you don't want to do the things that would qualify you for the available jobs, that's not because your technical posts wculdn't make you stand out, positively, it's because you're choosing not to!

I'm already infamous for my personal opinions in the tech world. Will removing he personal posts and putting them on a separate blog really work? (I do already have a domain.)

I'm not so sure it would work. By the time I thought about it, I had already gone viral on HN and the personal attacks had started.

Yes, absolutely, it will work fine. People on the Internet don't have that long of a memory and many people will not have seen your articles on HN. No one is going to look your site up on the wayback machine.

You can also ask dang to delete some of your posts on HN if it helps disassociate your name from discussions like these (though I doubt most people would think to look you up on HN based on a name)

Okay, thank you.

But I'm still going to carry when I feel I need to.

It could be when they see that https://git.gavinhoward.com/gavin/petty-tyrant-businesses

While I disagree with the stance and tone of that repo, I appreciate that someone stops being a corporate lackey even on their personal websites; we've all become sterile, pleasant representations of the ideal worker just hoping for someone to have the decency to pay us for our programming ability and talent.

Maybe be a little careful with the conspiracy theories, but I am quite done with the corporate-friendly personas we are pushing in our tech world.

I wanted to write a couple posts about anarchism on my personal blog, nothing crazy, and kept being concerned it might drive off a potential recruiter. Who the hell cares, a company where I cannot have a touch of personality is not a place I want to work at either.

Must be because I learned this job in the early 2000s, when sysadmins were wearing black shirts and listening to death metal, and the CEO stayed well away from that office, not the shirt-wearing, well-trimmed DevOps you see at conferences these days.

The only potentially "controversial" idea (as in, corp might not like it but will have to deal with it) that is still accepted in tech is being trans or a furry. I have no issue with either, mind you, just pointing out that anything else is a no-no.

Do what everyone does for this: make a side blog under a pseudonym.

I thought about it but no. I am OK with who I am, and I don't have any hate speech to share that I need to hide my identity. I just want to show the Internet world a side of me that is not only the stereotypical software engineer, because I'm not. No one is, is the point I'm making.

We all have our quirks, and we should celebrate them. I know your blog, I can't say I understand where you're coming from or that I relate very much with your persona, but I appreciate that you're able to stand out as your own, and I'm able to recognise you among the masses.

But in many cases, outside the fight for gender identity freedom, this is not possible in the world of modern social media, where you're always one step from being lynched by a mob because you dared go against the grain. The Twitterverse is the reason we're all sterile clones of each other, dividing everybody into a us vs them culture battle. That's too much nonsense for me.

Yes but really, having a pseudonym that is wholly unrelated to you and letting you get things out on that side blog that way can be invaluable. I have at least two such side blogs. Statistically you've probably read one of those side blog articles without knowing.

Yes you might be right. Also the hacker culture has always been centered around pseudonyms and fake identities. My quest might be a bit quixotic in this day and age.

Thanks for the level headed conversation

Remember: wordpress.com blogs are free. I put my email address in my Hacker News bio if you want to reach out.

There's a difference between posting about anarchism, and being an anti-vaxxer/anti-masker.

I generally don't care about a colleague's politics (as long as they don't constantly bring it out in work-related conversations), but not sure I want to work with someone who is going to be a dick about getting vaccinated or wearing a mask during a pandemic.

Beyond that, the guy won't patronize Haagen Dazs because they support BLM (which he believes to be a "terrorist organization"), and won't patronize Ben & Jerry's because they once tweeted that the phenomenon of police killings of black people is rooted in white supremacy.

Just looking at that list would make me gag at the idea of hiring this person, and I suspect I'm not alone by a long shot. Start reading stuff on his blog and... it gets worse.

I don't think this is about having a "corporate friendly" online persona... it's just about not being kinda a shitty person.

> I wanted to write a couple posts about anarchism on my personal blog, nothing crazy, and kept being concerned it might drive off a potential recruiter. Who the hell cares, a company where I cannot have a touch of personality is not a place I want to work at either.

If it's important to you then you should. There are places that allow/encourage people to be individuals.

>The only potentially "controversial" idea (as in, corp might not like it but will have to deal with it) that is still accepted in tech is being trans or a furry. I have no issue with either, mind you, just pointing out that anything else is a no-no.

That said be careful what you write and how you phrase it because it's one thing to have an opinion, and another to make a statement like that.

> That said be careful what you write and how you phrase it because it's one thing to have an opinion, and another to make a statement like that.

That's the bloody point. Fuck having to walk on eggshells, especially when I made it quite clear I have no issues with that. I had to be quite careful with the wording, and I know exactly this opens me to be attacked and pointed out as a bigot because I equated gender identity struggles with identity in general. How dare I.

We're all walking on eggshells and get quickly silenced if we even dare question it. I do not wish the Internet to operate under mob rule.

No, what you are railing against is that your actions have consequences. But it is your choice wether you are willing to bear them and act or not and do not act. That's a basic anarchist tenet reaching back to the Cynics of ancient Greece.

The things you say in public could be heard by someone and those someones have the gall to form an opinion of you you don't like -- some may even confront you about it.

Disagreement, unemployability, hostility, these are among the prices we pay for saying things in public places such as the internet. You can decide to pay the price and maybe turn it into a fruitful discussion (granted, unlikely on the internet) or you can shut up and seethe with anger for "being silenced".

You made a conscious decision to introduce gender identity into the discussion when nobody else was talking about it. It's not walking on eggshells for getting pulled up on you bringing up your beliefs when nobody asked.

> especially when I made it quite clear I have no issues with that.

No, you didn't. You pretty much said "just saying" as though that absolves you of what you actually said [0].

[0] https://www.npr.org/2010/12/18/132160770/its-rude-its-crude-...

You are the one introducing gender identity into this subthread. The poster you reply to has done no such thing.

People increasingly don't even read the posts before the go off on ideological rants and false accusations.

> People increasingly don't even read the posts before the go off on ideological rants and false accusations.

Eh? The comment I replied to said `The only potentially "controversial" idea (as in, corp might not like it but will have to deal with it) that is still accepted in tech is being trans or a furry. I have no issue with either, mind you, just pointing out that anything else is a no-no.`

I should be able to mention it en passant without having to dive deep into my opinions of the matter which are wholly unrelated and just a way to entrap me.

The discussion is around identity, and mentioning that these days only gender identity is a corporate-acceptable struggle. I claim that identity in general should be celebrated. I shan't be afraid to say, on my blog I'm an anarchist, or, for argument's sake, I'm a satanist, I am trans, I vote Trump, Google is a shitty company, or Star Wars is a terrible franchise.

> I should be able to mention it en passant without having to dive deep into my opinions of the matter which are wholly unrelated

No, you don't get to do that on any topic. If you write a blog post on a programming language feature, and in the middle of your post decide to slip in a note about your feelings on the middle east conflict, web3/crypto or your political opinions, expect people to talk about that. You decided it was important enough to mention in your post, so it's up for discussion.

> and just a way to entrap me.

Nah, you don't get "woe is me" card if you shoehorn in a dog whistle and get called out on it.

> I shan't be afraid to say, on my blog I'm an anarchist, or, for argument's sake, I'm a satanist, I am trans, I vote Trump, Google is a shitty company, or Star Wars is a terrible franchise.

Do that. But don't be surprised if people treat your words equally.

If you can't keep your message on-point, that's a you problem, not an everyone else problem.

> you shoehorn in a dog whistle

This is why social media is shit today. It's full of people unable to sustain intelligent discussion, so they try to find hidden meaning behind someone else's words.

You see a dog whistle, I see a person that gets off doing online witch hunts, instead of simply knowing how to disagree. If you have to resort to the personal attack, it's quite obvious there is no intelligent argument to be had here.

This is not Twitter. Good day.

This. I got a very mixed feeling after reading his blog. On one hand it looks like he lacks self-awareness to the point that he didn't realize the blog makes him quite unemployable. On the other hand, I don't want to live in a society where a blog can make you unemployable, and I kinda admire his audacity to keep it on.

Your blog is literally you, unless it’s some kind of made up alter ego.

You don’t want to live in a world where people won’t hire you because they don’t like you? You’re in for a rough ride.

My gender and race are me too, and I don't want to live in a world where my gender and race can significantly affect the chance that I get hired.

Actually my gender and race are much more "me" than my blog, cause I might change my opinions and my blog no longer reflects my internal "states".

That’s a different matter. What I meant is your blog is an extension of your personality.

You can’t discriminate based on sex or race, you can based on personality.

You're allowed to discriminate based on personality by law, but socially, if you do it with anyone you don't agree with completely:

1. You probably don't have many friends or

2. Your friends are not very diverse

Outside, in the real world, I can sit and have a very pleasant conversation on TV shows or Lisp interpreters with someone with terrible ideas or belief which are inconsequential to the matter at hand and are not part of the conversation. I can sit for a beer with childhood acquaintances that I know are racist, bigots or generally idiots, because we're talking about something else than the things I know we don't see eye to eye. And that's fine.

It is frightening that we're forgetting how real people outside the Internet are, behave and can get along in all their complexity.

> if you do it with anyone you don't agree with completely

Where did I say that?

> Outside, in the real world, I can sit and have a very pleasant conversation on TV shows or Lisp interpreters with someone with terrible ideas or belief which are inconsequential to the matter at hand and are not part of the conversation. I can sit for a beer with childhood acquaintances that I know are racist, bigots or generally idiots, because we're talking about something else than the things I know we don't see eye to eye. And that's fine.

Good for you. We're multinational company with thousands of employees, I personally been witness to situations where incompatibility in views caused issues during work. In my free time, with my childhood acquaintances I can talk about anything, during work with my colleagues I want to have productive workday - not arguing about current flavor of racism or whoever-knows-what's opinions about anarchy.

Yeah, but it's a bit like to refuse to work with someone who follows a different religion than you, or someone who is into astrology a bit too much.

Again I know it's not black and white and everyone has different red lines. If someone treats killing baby mammals as their favorite form of entertainment I probably can't work with them.

Oh, I quite realize my blog is a liability.

My original post was refuting claims that a blog and public code could get you hired.

I know that companies will see me as not a good fit. That's a good thing for both of us because I've come to realize that I'm not a good fit for a sterile office environment.

But it's not a refutation. They said a blog, not any blog or every blog.

A blog can get you hired.

Your blog will not.

It's funny, because posting that list of businesses is... also pretty petty. As is refusing to wear a mask during a global pandemic. I bet this guy also gets pissed off at the "no shoes, no shirt, no service" signs some businesses have.

I know if I was hiring for something and found that post, that'd be an instant no-hire from me.

> It's funny, because posting that list of businesses is... also pretty petty.

People boycott things all the time for all kinds of reasons. Some people boycott Israeli businesses due to the Israel/Palestine conflict, other people boycott MyPillow, and others boycott Chik-Fil-A, or more recently Budweiser. The outrage here on HN is a bit annoying, considering this used to be a fairly balanced platform.

As a consumer, boycotting a business is basically the only recourse for whatever grievance (justified or not) you may have which happens to be outside the purview of the law. Or is boycotting not petty only when your tribe does it?

Absolutely agree boycotting is a great way to tell a business you're not happy with something they do.

But if many people think you are being petty/bonkers/anti-something-they-care-about based on why you are boycotting particular businesses, that might cause you some trouble.

> Or is boycotting not petty only when your tribe does it?

There are certainly some boycotts I don't participate in, but respect the decision of those who do.

Boycotting is petty when people think it's petty (pettiness is an opinion, not an intrinsic property of something). If you want to talk about "tribes", sure, maybe a particular "tribe" thinks some particular boycott is petty. That's life.

I don't take much issue with personal boycotts but perhaps publishing the list would irk some people?

They’re boycotting business for complying with government regulations. It’s petty and it’s stupid.

Would you have felt that way when people were boycotting buses in the Jim Crow south?

There's a difference between boycotting ethical laws and unethical laws. Do you really need it spoonfed to you?

Instant no hire from me. Too vocal and opinionated, could be a liability later.

Jesus Christ.

It gets worse. His website has subscribe links to Gab and Parler accounts, and a rant whining about lobste.rs banning him for being transphobic that is completely un-introspective. https://gavinhoward.com/2022/07/lobste.rs-will-become-an-ech...

I don't care how good of a C whiz this person is, if I see that crap associated with an applicant their application is going straight to the incinerator. Even if I had no problem hiring bad, asshole human beings, this guy is a legal liability.

Un-introspective, huh?

People really don't read my blog posts very well.

If people can't read your posts then you need to write them more clearly. You're the author of them. Don't shift that personal responsibility onto the readers.

You're the one that isn't getting hired. Whether you recognize your error or not, the people looking to hire do. There's content in your posts that if they were in a company slack message would be a major liability. Most companies don't believe in breaking the law.

From reading through that blog post, he's not wrong is he?

The moderation of lobste.rs is nowhere near as even-handed as HN, as his example (and many others) demonstrates.

He is wrong, transphobia has no place anywhere. Trying to pass it under the thin guise of "unfair moderation" is both cowardly and thinly veiled. It certainly has no place in the workplace. Would he try to deny the identify of our trans senior developer? Would he say discriminatory things about our trans in house counsel? He has already shown from this blog he has transphobic beliefs and no problem saying discriminatory statements.

Beyond being an ethically bad and bigoted person, this guy would bring state and federal liability to the company from the first day on the job. I don't care if he disagrees, this isn't a matter up for discussion, I will not break the law for you.

But he wasn't being transphobic, far from it. He was reflecting upon his own experiences of gender dysphoria, what he learned from this, and how he dealt with it. His trans journey is no less valid than anyone else's.

This sort of thing is a instant black ball almost everywhere.

Wouldn't hire him on a supermarket checkout counter, the guy seems insane.

While he does feel that he "live[s] in a place where people generally share the same values" some of those values are probably a bit public for a "boring mainstream" company.

I'd suggest separate technical/non-technical blogs and only referring people to the first. I'm mostly thinking of all the blog posts that explicitly point to the disclaimer..

You don't have to hide the personal blog but this is probably a bit much for sites you point employers at.

I've thought about separating them. But by the time I thought about it, I was already famous for it.

I've come to expect it.

Notice that I never wondered why companies don't hire me. I merely said they don't. I know I'm not a good fit in a sterile work environment.