4 ms·
> I think we can all agree someone can be a poor software engineer and not have any red flags. This has been something I find myself musing over every now and
by tsumnia 6y ago
> I think we can all agree someone can be a poor software engineer and not have any red flags.
This has been something I find myself musing over every now and then for a couple years now. As we begin to relax barriers of entry, how do we maintain that some people fail/lose?
- ipnon 6y agoIn a business, you are either don't hire them in the beginning or fire them in the end. Not everyone should be a software engineer (where would the users come from?). A large labor market organizes people into better jobs when they are passed over for or fired from a position.
- tchaffee 6y ago> (where would the users come from?) I'm an engineer and I use loads of software. I bet you do too.
- tchaffee 6y agoI'm curious what makes you think we are relaxing barriers to entry? The senior engineers I've hired are highly productive. And diverse. My process does not have a low barrier to entry. The goal is to use more accurate signals. Instead of hiring people who are good at talking about algorithms at a white board I want to hire good software engineers. > some people fail / lose This comes off as a condescending way of thinking about the hiring process. Even if the candidate is not qualified for the position I want to leave them feeling like I helped them a little in their career or at the very least in their interviewing skills and confidence. You can find a good fit for a role without leaving the other candidates feeling like they failed. And I think that starts to get to the crux of the problem at some companies : the process is meant to boost the ego of the interviewer. Almost every senior dev has a few stories about how the interviewer just wanted to feel superior. We can do far better than that.