conro1108
conro1108 on Hacker News
In my experience, the problems given to juniors are often open ended “improve this” or “fix this” type projects, but smaller scope or lower priority things that more senior devs would just never get to.
I will say though, needing to socialize across other teams to understand the problem and drive the correct solution does strike me as more mid/senior level work.
It's a similar shape but with quite different conclusions
- low drive + low aptitude: never hire
Hammerstein thinks some use can be made of these folks
- low drive + high aptitude: hire for targeted use cases where you need expertise
Hammerstein has this group as high leadership positions
- high drive + low aptitude: hire, train, and foster aptitude growth
These are the ones who Hammerstein avoids
- high drive + high aptitude: hire on the spot
These go to the "General Staff"
Sounds like this is a hill you're willing to die on
In the Bay Area I’m also easily able to order alcohol on all the big delivery services, but they all seem pretty consistent about scanning your ID for age verification before they drop it off.
Only if you assume that everyone is either a vinyl buyer or record player buyer :)
Optional.of(null) throws a NullPointerException ;)
Optional.ofNullable(null) == Optional.empty()
I don’t understand. Why would the suppliers change the recipe to _add_ sesame? Is it not just that they accepted the “may contain sesame” label instead of removing (or proving the lack of) sesame?
They aren't saying they unfortunately _have_ fuck-you money, they're saying they unfortunately relate to wanting to have a small social circle and not have to "deal with it" anymore
According to David Wadhwani’s LinkedIn, he was at Adobe from 2002-2015 with his title listed as SVP and GM of the “digital media business unit” before rejoining in 2021 as the Chief Business Officer.
But "relatively affordable in the Bay Area" is still relatively very expensive nationally no?
Maybe the gap is just that the people surveyed overestimated their likelihood of working in a HCOL place (or the sample and/or population in question is legitimately biased toward that)
It's not clear to me why you think "I refuse to do the thing you're asking me to do" is _less_ reasonable than saying "I will only do the thing you're asking me if you pay me $large_amount"
To me, the latter response is perfectly reasonable. There are plenty of tasks that I wouldn't want to do as part of my regular work duties, that I would be happy to do in exchange for the right bonus check.
If a manager is looking for someone to perform the task, and they decided to _fire_ an employee because they said "I'd do it for $X" instead of saying "No I won't do it", I'd say that manager was either on a delusional ego trip or looking for another chump to exploit.
I have a similar approach that works well, you just need one more filtering step.
Anyone who reacts negatively to the salary request, you ignore and move on. Don't even bother replying.
For the "lets hop on a call" folks, I have a second copy-paste that just politely states that my schedule is tight between interviewing and my day job and that I want to ensure a reasonable fit is possible before investing a lot of time.
Anyone who _still_ hasn't given a clear answer after those 2 tries I stop replying to.
To be clear, well north of 90% of inbound linkedin recruiters will fail this test, but I've found it to be a surprisingly low-effort way to separate valid opportunities from uninteresting recruiter spam
AFAICT it's pretty common among tech companies for "recruiting" to be called "talent acquisition" and "human resources" to be called "people operations" or similar
Getting RSUs doesn’t ever “suck”, but getting 70%+ less (denominated in $usd) money in your quarterly vesting than before is unpleasant - even if you knew it was coming at some point and don’t critically depend on that income.
What’s more common - hiring managers who see the inclusion of a GitHub as a small positive signal but don’t scrutinize heavily (or even more likely don’t bother to click into it), or those that dig deep and scrutinize open source contributions as a primary decision factor?
I agree that we could collectively be more mindful about why we're doing things and what we're getting out of them, but this seems like a strange example to emphasize the point.
Do many people claim that they're intrinsically motivated to do their jobs independent of compensation?
My answer to "would you still do the job you do if they no longer gave you money for it?" has been an emphatic NO for every day of my working life and I assumed that was the common perspective.
I think it's possible to recognize that 3rd party recruiters can be good or bad at their job while also coming to the conclusion that the bad outweighs the good to a degree that it's not worth the time to figure it out.
It's certainly a privilege to be in a position where you'd still have an excess of inbound job opportunities even without 3rd party recruiters. But if that's the position you're in, it's one of the more effective strategies I've seen to increase signal:noise.
Individual contributor (as opposed to management)
Sure I would, if someone else can pay 50% more than my perfectly reasonably manager could.
> You should behave as an employee like the employee you wish was working for you.
Why should I serve my employers interests over my own?
I will behave as an employee in the way that is most beneficial to me personally. How much I care about my employers success is 100% dependent on how much I personally benefit from their success. If my employer wants a better transition than 2 weeks, they need to start thinking about how to incentivize that behavior.
I’m going to w2 a bit over 300k this year as a senior software engineer for a quite large SaaS company in the Bay Area, and the general impression is that we’re a “tier-2” company in terms of comp behind FAANG and really top tech companies.
> It really is true today that buying a trusted used car is WAY easier than buying a new car.
Could you elaborate on this? Is this a recent development?
I bought a new car in November 2020 and while I certainly don’t _love_ the dealership experience and I’m probably less uncomfortable with financial negations than your average person, it didn’t strike me as a particularly painful experience.
Isn't the enthusiasm enough of an argument? People like it. It's good to do thinks we like.
Did this really suggest not earning more money to avoid a higher marginal rate...?
I might be misunderstanding some sarcasm from someone, but isn't government intervention and support during a time of crisis pretty firmly in the neoliberal playbook?
From where I'm standing it's... pretty much everyone else who rails against large scale bailouts. The libertarian crowd is more on the "see where the chips fall" side of things while the more left-leaning/progressive groups didn't appreciate govt money going to businesses instead of to workers directly.
I'd argue it's a bit dramatic to say I was "forced from an area" but I did move from the east coast to the Bay Area largely because pay disparity was much larger than the difference in cost of living. I saw that as an opportunity, not a punishment.
> A lot of it has to do with wage suppression
This is where I get a bit confused. Why would companies artificially push engineers to the areas where they command these disproportionately large salaries? Are you saying that they overpay engineers in general specifically to suppress wages of engineers that _are_ in Texas?