5 ms·

The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. None of these bits of advice are at all easy to implement. Find a worthwhile project, bu

The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. None of these bits of advice are at all easy to implement. Find a worthwhile project, build it, make sure your git commits have sensible messages? Takes ages. Getting to the point where your open source contributions are actually positive contributions? Easier said than done. The other thing that really makes you stand out is relevant experience. To get that you either need skill or luck, both of which are not simple to get. So yeah, it's hard to get a first job, it really is. Young people legitimately complain about that prereq effect, that you need have experience to get experience.

mooreds 5y ago
> The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. That's the point! If it was cheap, it isn't high value. If it isn't high value, it isn't going to distinguish you. In my opinion, as someone who has talked and interviewed new devs, it is better for the average junior dev to focus on 10 companies, learn about their business, research their team and tech, and apply, than to send 1000 resumes to companies at random.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  >> The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. > That's the point! Neither of these is correct. High-value signaling is difficult to fake. If what you want to signal is wealth, then signaling is expensive. But if you're looking for a job, you probably aren't trying to signal wealth. Signaling competence doesn't have to be expensive.
  - ebiester 5y ago
    I believe the expense, in this case, is talking about cost in time, not money.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      That is not a necessary part of signaling competence. It's a part of the method lordnacho wishes to recommend.
  - mooreds 5y ago
    Sorry if I was imprecise in my verbiage. I was talking about expense in the general sense (time, effort, focus) not just money. For example, it takes more work to research a company, find the hiring manager, see what meetups the team members might attend, determine part of their tech stack, build an app in that tech stack using their product, volunteer to give a talk on that app, let the manager and team know about your talk and then ask about open positions, than it does to shoot a resume off. But if I was at a company where a candidate did the former set of activities, it would knock my socks off and they'd definitely move to the front of the interview line. Note, not everyone has time for this particular way to stand out (we all have different obligations), but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      > but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out. This doesn't really accomplish anything worthwhile. Now you're hiring and you receive 50 applications each with their own unique way of standing out, so you're supposedly considering which of 50 points in a 50-dimensional space you like the best. Obviously the only thing you can do is map each point onto a one-dimensional space and choose the highest value. To do this you need to know exactly how much you care about any given resume item. It's more effective for you, and easier for everyone involved, if you just decide what you want and do an assessment based on that.
      - mooreds 5y ago
        > > but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out. > Now you're hiring and you receive 50 applications each with their own unique way of standing out, so you're supposedly considering which of 50 points in a 50-dimensional space you like the best. Just because people should do something doesn't mean they will. > It's more effective for you, and easier for everyone involved, if you just decide what you want and do an assessment based on that. This is a great approach and can pair nicely with the effort based filter I outline. I don't know about you, but when I hired a new developer a few years ago for a remote position, no experience required, for a company that isn't nationally known, I got ~100 resumes in not very long. I also wanted to pay people for their time (at least a nominal sum!) if they did an assessment for us. That meant I had to have some way to distinguish folks. Of course, I did the quick 'nope' pass, but still had a lot of folks to weed through. All I'm saying is that as a candidate, putting in effort will help you land a job, precisely because effort is expensive and most folks won't do it.
  - yCombLinks 5y ago
    He doesn't mean expensive in terms of money.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      If you read my responses to the other two comments that came before you, you probably noticed that that isn't relevant to my point. I don't mean expensive in terms of money either. What were you trying to say?
      - yCombLinks 5y ago
        No, I didn't read them, they weren't there when I loaded the page. You're unnecessarily aggressive in your response. Your previous reply was all about wealth, and how signaling outside of wealth was not expensive. Hard not to frame that as viewing it in terms of money.
ushakov 5y ago
i think this is a good tradeoff people who have a real passion have likely already committed to some project, either their own or open-source as opposed to the ones who are only in for the money
- bckr 5y ago
  Venturing to break the dichotomy: Maybe they're passionate about the money!
  - ushakov 5y ago
    their passion is devaluing (6% and growing per year)
__turbobrew__ 5y ago
Many of my peers got their first jobs through university co-op programs. It may not be pleasant, but going to university for compsci/compeng with a strong co-op program is probably the most surefire way to get a solid first job and start to your career. I know some people on HN love to rag on those who go to university to become a dev, but I still think it is the most straightforward way to start your career. I also come from a country where university doesn’t cost a kidney so maybe my US peers would think going to university is too expensive for the benefits.
sedivy94 5y ago
Thank you for saying this. Rare to come across someone here who is realistic about the situation.

mooreds 5y ago

> The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. That's the point! If it was cheap, it isn't high value. If it isn't high value, it isn't going to distinguish you. In my opinion, as someone who has talked and interviewed new devs, it is better for the average junior dev to focus on 10 companies, learn about their business, research their team and tech, and apply, than to send 1000 resumes to companies at random.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
>> The problem with signalling is that high value signalling is expensive. > That's the point! Neither of these is correct. High-value signaling is difficult to fake. If what you want to signal is wealth, then signaling is expensive. But if you're looking for a job, you probably aren't trying to signal wealth. Signaling competence doesn't have to be expensive.
- ebiester 5y ago
  I believe the expense, in this case, is talking about cost in time, not money.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    That is not a necessary part of signaling competence. It's a part of the method lordnacho wishes to recommend.
- mooreds 5y ago
  Sorry if I was imprecise in my verbiage. I was talking about expense in the general sense (time, effort, focus) not just money. For example, it takes more work to research a company, find the hiring manager, see what meetups the team members might attend, determine part of their tech stack, build an app in that tech stack using their product, volunteer to give a talk on that app, let the manager and team know about your talk and then ask about open positions, than it does to shoot a resume off. But if I was at a company where a candidate did the former set of activities, it would knock my socks off and they'd definitely move to the front of the interview line. Note, not everyone has time for this particular way to stand out (we all have different obligations), but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out. This doesn't really accomplish anything worthwhile. Now you're hiring and you receive 50 applications each with their own unique way of standing out, so you're supposedly considering which of 50 points in a 50-dimensional space you like the best. Obviously the only thing you can do is map each point onto a one-dimensional space and choose the highest value. To do this you need to know exactly how much you care about any given resume item. It's more effective for you, and easier for everyone involved, if you just decide what you want and do an assessment based on that.
    - mooreds 5y ago
      > > but in my opinion, every new developer should find some way to stand out. > Now you're hiring and you receive 50 applications each with their own unique way of standing out, so you're supposedly considering which of 50 points in a 50-dimensional space you like the best. Just because people should do something doesn't mean they will. > It's more effective for you, and easier for everyone involved, if you just decide what you want and do an assessment based on that. This is a great approach and can pair nicely with the effort based filter I outline. I don't know about you, but when I hired a new developer a few years ago for a remote position, no experience required, for a company that isn't nationally known, I got ~100 resumes in not very long. I also wanted to pay people for their time (at least a nominal sum!) if they did an assessment for us. That meant I had to have some way to distinguish folks. Of course, I did the quick 'nope' pass, but still had a lot of folks to weed through. All I'm saying is that as a candidate, putting in effort will help you land a job, precisely because effort is expensive and most folks won't do it.
- yCombLinks 5y ago
  He doesn't mean expensive in terms of money.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    If you read my responses to the other two comments that came before you, you probably noticed that that isn't relevant to my point. I don't mean expensive in terms of money either. What were you trying to say?
    - yCombLinks 5y ago
      No, I didn't read them, they weren't there when I loaded the page. You're unnecessarily aggressive in your response. Your previous reply was all about wealth, and how signaling outside of wealth was not expensive. Hard not to frame that as viewing it in terms of money.

ushakov 5y ago

i think this is a good tradeoff people who have a real passion have likely already committed to some project, either their own or open-source as opposed to the ones who are only in for the money

bckr 5y ago
Venturing to break the dichotomy: Maybe they're passionate about the money!
- ushakov 5y ago
  their passion is devaluing (6% and growing per year)

__turbobrew__ 5y ago

Many of my peers got their first jobs through university co-op programs. It may not be pleasant, but going to university for compsci/compeng with a strong co-op program is probably the most surefire way to get a solid first job and start to your career. I know some people on HN love to rag on those who go to university to become a dev, but I still think it is the most straightforward way to start your career. I also come from a country where university doesn’t cost a kidney so maybe my US peers would think going to university is too expensive for the benefits.

sedivy94 5y ago

Thank you for saying this. Rare to come across someone here who is realistic about the situation.