3 ms·

The market is in equilibrium. Physics and Math graduate unemployment rates are virtually zero, and practically all of us work in software. That a lot of CS gr

• bulatb 10y ago
  > by definition - if they're qualified, they will get hired It sounds like you're explicitly committing the No True Scotsman fallacy. It's also an example of Goodhart's law: the people getting hired are demonstrably most qualified at getting hired, but the correlation between being good and being hired is quite clearly less than 1.0.
  • wayn3 10y ago
    It sounds like you're trying to tell me that its more difficult to be perceived as a competent engineer than it is to actually be a competent engineer. If you're good at what you're doing but somehow suck at presenting yourself in an appropriate way, retain an executive coach for 5 hours or whatever..
• ryandrake 10y ago
  > Physics and Math graduate unemployment rates are virtually zero, and practically all of us work in software. How many of them are overqualified for what they're doing and would jump if the market were paying more or if there were better opportunities? You can't say much about whether it's an employer's or employee's market merely by citing unemployment %. > "If you gave us another 100k great engineers we would only hire about 15k of those" - said none of the big 4 ever. They are perpetually hiring and they will absorb any capable engineer who comes their way. You know that. Don't pretend there's a shortage of jobs for qualified software engineers. That's just silly. Any discussion about a shortage or surplus of jobs/talent is meaningless without specifying compensation. Many companies would gladly take 100K great engineers at a salary of $20K/year. What if the going rate were $1M/year? Would there still be a shortage of engineers? When the bid and ask are far apart, both sides will complain about how hard it is to make a deal.
  • wayn3 10y ago
    > How many of them are overqualified for what they're doing and would jump if the market were paying more or if there were better opportunities? You can't say much about whether it's an employer's or employee's market merely by citing unemployment %. A lot of them are overqualified. But they are handsomely compensated. They could do less boring work, but there's less of a market for it. > Any discussion about a shortage or surplus of jobs/talent is meaningless without specifying compensation. Many companies would gladly take 100K great engineers at a salary of $20K/year. What if the going rate were $1M/year? Would there still be a shortage of engineers? When the bid and ask are far apart, both sides will complain about how hard it is to make a deal. I made that statement under the assumption of current market rates. Whatever google/facebook/uber/apple/microsoft are paying. Quit pretending that they wouldn't hire more engineers if there was supply. They clearly are willing to. Sure there's some hyperbole to it. But the entire valley + amazon/microsoft could easily absorb another 100k engineers without that event drawing down salaries significantly.
• lj3 10y ago
  > Qualified people don't have difficulty finding work (by definition - if they're qualified, they will get hired). I know lots of qualified people who went through one or more stretches where they couldn't find work. Most employers wouldn't know a qualified engineer if they saw one.