4 ms·
> One is that many Staff-level roles just don’t require upkeep of the same technical skills that seniors need Im sorry, what? I just cant stand proliferation o
by dilyevsky 2y ago
> One is that many Staff-level roles just don’t require upkeep of the same technical skills that seniors need
Im sorry, what? I just cant stand proliferation of this meme and ideas usually associated with it (“you don't need CS knowledge”, avoid writing code at all cost, “everyone has not idea what they’re doing”, etc)
- johnnyanmac 2y agowell she's certainly right about one thing: >Everybody defines Staff differently I've heard a few roles define staff as mid level, and others define it as basically a founder/fellow level role. At that point it's probably better to read the job description first instead of assume what experience they require.
- wonnage 2y agoA lot of FAANG staff engineering is just navigating bureaucracy and making sure the product gets out the door on time. Or stuff that isn't complicated on an algorithms level but hard nonetheless because the codebase sucks, the packages are outdated, etc. I don't think "hard" engineering gets you promoted reliably unless it's business-defining. Actually any work that has a one time benefit seems to vanish by the next performance review. You're better off (career wise) implementing a process that might help 10% of the time than a one-time savings of $1m in compute costs.
- dilyevsky 2y agoMost folks are aware of the FAANG dysfunction at this point but this article was explicitly not about FAANG. I've actually been continuously surprised by stuff like this going on in much smaller shops, but hey - that's what you get by having near-0 interest rates for a decade.