3 ms·

In the past year, I have worked with people making six figures in technical positions that know as much about computers as my grandmother. And I'm not exaggerat

In the past year, I have worked with people making six figures in technical positions that know as much about computers as my grandmother. And I'm not exaggerating (and she's no Grace Hopper). Like, doesn't understand the basics of how a computer works, much less an operating system (and I don't mean the kernel, I mean like, what a shell is, how programs are executed, environment variables, file permissions, devices, local networking, local storage, symbolic links, user accounts, etc). There is a sea of candidates who are both insanely ill-equipped, yet pass interviews regularly. I believe the competent candidate pool was probably exhausted 5 years ago, and businesses just kept hiring clueless people because they felt they had no choice. They aren't given enough user support and no training at all. As a result, employees are much less productive, struggling to do basic computing tasks when they were hired as technical people. And yet are payed vast sums by companies with more money than sense.

chasd00 4y ago
you know how there's that mythical 10x developer? what we really need is 10x HR. People who find and hire qualified workers 10x better than typical HR departments.
- kerblang 4y ago
  This is mostly true, but I think you're blaming HR for tech teams' own inability to run job interviews effectively. HR might be able to add an X or two, but the tech teams themselves have a 10x gap waiting to be exploited by innovative approaches.
socialismisok 4y ago
Can they do the job they were hired for? Because if someone has a good attitude, can write good enough code, and is willing to learn I can quickly teach them the Linux basics. Like, if someone doesn't know how to chmod or how to set up a .zshrc, I can get them up and running in an afternoon. These folks aren't clueless, they've just learned at a higher level of abstraction then you did. That's fine.
- throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
  Would you hire a lawyer that can't tie his shoes?
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    Your example is poor, because most 8 year olds don't know how local networking works, but do know how shoes work. But I'll engage with the questions intent. Would you hire a lawyer who doesn't know all the skills of their trade yet, because they are just entering the workforce? Does it impact his ability to practice law? Are they interested in learning but never had the opportunity? Sure, assuming I had something very straightforward I needed them for. Heck, a lot of places offer discounts or free legal support based entirely on this premise - having an issue as a tenant? Go ask a young lawyer who is volunteering their time and is missing some skills, but knows the basics of landlord tenant laws.
    - filoleg 4y ago
      Let me correct their example to make it more on topic and relevant to the problem. Would you hire a lawyer who cannot use a computer (so no email, digital records, etc) and communucates exclusively through fax machines? Mind you, they can claim to be a good lawyer otherwise, since none of those things directly contradict their claim of good lawyer skills. But something tells me that if they don't use digital record-keeping and can't utilize PACER, I will have my doubts in their practical usefulness.
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        If they are willing to learn, and I need a cheap, entry level lawyer, why not? Show up at office, get paperwork for a lease or a will, pay the lawyer, and move on. An entry level engineer who doesn't know Linux is fine. An entry level lawyer who doesn't know pacer is fine. You just have to train them and only give them work they can handle with their skill set. Some of the strongest engineers who walked through my teams started with no practical Linux knowledge, but they had a can do attitude. Give me the inexperienced but driven engineer over the experienced but unmoving engineer 10 out of 10 times.
noodle 4y ago
I don't think the first paragraph and the second paragraph necessarily flow into one another. I've worked with a lot of people in tech that are very proficient at their jobs that have no clue about "basic" computing stuff like local networking, symlinks, chmod, user accounts, etc.. Because they don't need to be. And they're definitely worth the 6 figures they're paid.

chasd00 4y ago

you know how there's that mythical 10x developer? what we really need is 10x HR. People who find and hire qualified workers 10x better than typical HR departments.

kerblang 4y ago
This is mostly true, but I think you're blaming HR for tech teams' own inability to run job interviews effectively. HR might be able to add an X or two, but the tech teams themselves have a 10x gap waiting to be exploited by innovative approaches.

socialismisok 4y ago

Can they do the job they were hired for? Because if someone has a good attitude, can write good enough code, and is willing to learn I can quickly teach them the Linux basics. Like, if someone doesn't know how to chmod or how to set up a .zshrc, I can get them up and running in an afternoon. These folks aren't clueless, they've just learned at a higher level of abstraction then you did. That's fine.

throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
Would you hire a lawyer that can't tie his shoes?
- socialismisok 4y ago
  Your example is poor, because most 8 year olds don't know how local networking works, but do know how shoes work. But I'll engage with the questions intent. Would you hire a lawyer who doesn't know all the skills of their trade yet, because they are just entering the workforce? Does it impact his ability to practice law? Are they interested in learning but never had the opportunity? Sure, assuming I had something very straightforward I needed them for. Heck, a lot of places offer discounts or free legal support based entirely on this premise - having an issue as a tenant? Go ask a young lawyer who is volunteering their time and is missing some skills, but knows the basics of landlord tenant laws.
  - filoleg 4y ago
    Let me correct their example to make it more on topic and relevant to the problem. Would you hire a lawyer who cannot use a computer (so no email, digital records, etc) and communucates exclusively through fax machines? Mind you, they can claim to be a good lawyer otherwise, since none of those things directly contradict their claim of good lawyer skills. But something tells me that if they don't use digital record-keeping and can't utilize PACER, I will have my doubts in their practical usefulness.
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      If they are willing to learn, and I need a cheap, entry level lawyer, why not? Show up at office, get paperwork for a lease or a will, pay the lawyer, and move on. An entry level engineer who doesn't know Linux is fine. An entry level lawyer who doesn't know pacer is fine. You just have to train them and only give them work they can handle with their skill set. Some of the strongest engineers who walked through my teams started with no practical Linux knowledge, but they had a can do attitude. Give me the inexperienced but driven engineer over the experienced but unmoving engineer 10 out of 10 times.

noodle 4y ago

I don't think the first paragraph and the second paragraph necessarily flow into one another. I've worked with a lot of people in tech that are very proficient at their jobs that have no clue about "basic" computing stuff like local networking, symlinks, chmod, user accounts, etc.. Because they don't need to be. And they're definitely worth the 6 figures they're paid.