qthrowayq0909

This is a perfectly sane, at least from business point of view, argument. It is being treated with a tantrum of downvotes. That in turns shows a lot about the state of affairs in a certain bunch of programmers. Most importantly that they put their own narrowly defined version of excellence above the importance of maintainability and thus tangible business value.

To put it bluntly. I'd hire the downvoted guy/gal in a heartbeat but would shy away from the downvoters. Why? Because I need to deliver business value which pays for our salaries. And I need to do it today and tomorrow and in years from now.

This is a message to normal people that understand that coding is a _social_ activity that has an audience in the present (your coworkers) and in the future (poor maintainers). Not only you're not alone in this but you are the majority.

Tried to raise to management and/or team lead. It's really their job to handle a$$holes (not to mention to not hire them in the first place).

But, most of the times they either didn't care or were spineless so next up is moving away either to a different role or team or department or a company. Every place has a$$holes but some places have a culture in place that does not allow them to go unchecked.

PS: Is him ex-FAANG? Usually it were such people for me.

New era of hype definitely.

That sounds like a sweatshop from hell. I also find it hard to believe that 5+ years rolled by without incident in such a place. Could it be that you were just ignorant of similar cases?

Anyhow, that was clearly a toxic place where you shouldn't spend more time.

Best of luck on your next job.

I'm just saying that the demographics of the audience were probably skewed in the beginning of the thread.

Not to state the obvious but the fact that this commend is the most upvoted in this thread kind of proves one of the premises wrong.

It seems that a lot of people are for transparency (I certainly am) despite them not being too vocal about it.

" I've been in the market for a couple of months, and I have no idea what employers are looking for"

IMO that's because they (employers) too have no idea what they are looking for. It's a mess and only getting worse.

My 2 cents is just say yes to that rare proposal that comes after one or 2 interviews. And yes, they do exist but almost everyone passes them because "if it was so easy the role must suck". Well, the possibility of role sucking is exactly the same if you went through 10 hoops to get the job.

Yup. They're also good at that. But the bottom line remains. Anything of real importance still gets invented there.

Btw, I am European, living in EU.

Most of these things were invented decades ago. At more recent times EU is good at inventing paperwork and red tape. And suits and scandals.

Europe. The land of "invent nothing - regulate everything".

because HR-wise a company needs to be sure it is working with whom it thinks it is working.

See that under the prism of rising interview scams.

Tangent, but I think things like that will spell the end of remote working and remote interviewing.

Legalese is a way for the lawyers and those who can afford them to wrap up the other party in a piece of paper and make him/her sign off to things that normally wouldn't.

A side-effect is chocking up a lot of entrepreneurship/inventions/partnerships/etc in favor of protecting the said parties.

Thanks for the reply! With regards to payment I don't see that clause so things look ok there.

But noticed another clause essentially forbidding me to reveal anything related to the said contract _including_ even the fact that I'm in a contract with the umbrella.

That's a whole new level on madness...

How do you trust accounting to some unknown overseas guys?

It just seems too scary to me...