3 ms·

Even this is some boilerplate text for the reality (at least how i experienced it) You had a two week course in University on ML? That goes right on your curri

Even this is some boilerplate text for the reality (at least how i experienced it) You had a two week course in University on ML? That goes right on your curriculum as Skill. Had an Excel course in school? "Office suite knowledge" Created one endpoint in a C# .Net Core API? API programming check. So our company hired some of these full stack freelancers. While the code "works", it is not anywhere in a acceptable performance range and full of bugs. A SQL server job that runs two hours to create some 1000 simple new datarows is just not okay. But for the business end, server job performance is not a value they can "feel" unless there is some UI connected to it. The point I want to make that it's a potentially harmful game in the long term for any company that reads the skillsets of a developer without ever asking 1 or two questions.

tluyben2 6y ago
It is harmful and I have seen it many times. People are often selected on their frontend portfolio but they did 'a bit of backend' as well and thus they are 'fullstack'. The end result is systems that are completely lob sided; nice frontends in the latest tech with insecure, slow, badly created backends that crumble under load. But it doesn't matter because you can get better performance throwing money at it in a pretty simple straightforward way, while hiring other programmers, refactoring etc are very unsure endeavors(it could end up worse, deadlines aren't made etc). I have said it here many times before here; a lot of funded startups (especially) simply prefer to burn investor money rather than do things properly. I see aws/gcp bills of 20-100k per month that can be below 10k with a few weeks (sometimes even days) of effort from someone who knows what they are doing, but nope, not happening. Automatically resolvable mistakes like having no (!!) indexes in a mysql database and so running $8k/month db bills to keep it performant (multiple times often) is becoming a little be too normal for my taste.

tluyben2 6y ago

It is harmful and I have seen it many times. People are often selected on their frontend portfolio but they did 'a bit of backend' as well and thus they are 'fullstack'. The end result is systems that are completely lob sided; nice frontends in the latest tech with insecure, slow, badly created backends that crumble under load. But it doesn't matter because you can get better performance throwing money at it in a pretty simple straightforward way, while hiring other programmers, refactoring etc are very unsure endeavors(it could end up worse, deadlines aren't made etc). I have said it here many times before here; a lot of funded startups (especially) simply prefer to burn investor money rather than do things properly. I see aws/gcp bills of 20-100k per month that can be below 10k with a few weeks (sometimes even days) of effort from someone who knows what they are doing, but nope, not happening. Automatically resolvable mistakes like having no (!!) indexes in a mysql database and so running $8k/month db bills to keep it performant (multiple times often) is becoming a little be too normal for my taste.