> 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.