18 ms·

Lots of people are sceptical but I cannot imagine a use for entry level positions anymore. At my work everybody got to calling AI "the intern", which is not con

by vvpan 1y ago

Lots of people are sceptical but I cannot imagine a use for entry level positions anymore. At my work everybody got to calling AI "the intern", which is not confusing because we do not have and have no use for interns.

mlsu 1y ago
I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of interns.
- rimbo789 1y ago
  Free labour, easy to dispose of labour? Even though it’s low quality at that price point it can’t be beat. That’s the only use I have ever seen.
- siva7 1y ago
  Oh he is understanding the abuse perfectly
rekenaut 1y ago
Traditionally, interns exist as a well-vetted and well-shaped supply of labor (which is very difficult to find through the traditional hiring process). The work they complete is secondary. Are companies going to stop needing good employees? Is nobody going to need to work in 40 years when all the current employees are phased out?
- rimbo789 1y ago
  If interns existed like that they haven’t in the 21st century. They are a free disposable short term labour to be ripped through. Also what company do you know of thinks in 40 year terms? The longest budgeting process I’ve been part of has been 3 years and the year 3 numbers were understood to be pure wish fulfilment
  - mothballed 1y ago
    I'm not sure when interns stopped being part of the hiring chain, but I remember almost universally circa 2010 or 2011 in the great recession, almost every single intern and co-op student I knew were told bluntly there would be absolutely no hiring of them into full time roles. Up until the great recession it was pretty normal, almost expected, that a good internship turned into a good job offer. I'm guessing that just never reversed.
  - _se 1y ago
    That's precisely how most companies use interns. You have no idea what you're talking about.
nicce 1y ago
So what are the long term risks when senior staff leaves and those need to be replaced with new seniors that have never seen the existing work vs. promoting younger people who knows the projects and practises?
- globular-toast 1y ago
  Long... term... risk? What is this archaic concept? I just want to get into a position where I can extract rent from children when they grow up. Why do I need to worry about this so called long term risk?
  - mothballed 1y ago
    >I just want to get into a position where I can extract rent from children when they grow up. That's called social security.
- kypro 1y ago
  These days normally what corporates do is bring in people from abroad who have the skills. The idea that companies would seek to train up domestic workers if there is a skill shortage is outdated today – even if theoretically this might be good for the domestic workforce. It's just cheaper and easier to import the skills needed.
  - nicce 1y ago
    I think I disagree. It sounds like that companies that do this are average at most and has nothing own - otherwise it would not be possible to just replace the workers. If your company is average, it does not attract real talents. But maybe my comment was not noting every discipline. I was mostly thinking about software development.
    - kypro 1y ago
      I'm not talking about "replacing" workers. I'm talking about hiring the most qualified which in a global talent pool will almost always be someone from abroad. There's no reason for a company to hire a relatively unskilled graduate domestically when they could hire someone with more experience from abroad. If you look at the workforce makeup of many large tech companies today there's a reason Indian and East-Asian talent is so overrepresented, and it's not because they lack talent. It's because if you actually want to hire the best of the best you're not going to bring in juniors from the domestic workforce and train them up.
ddddang 1y ago
[dead]

by vvpan 1y ago

mlsu 1y ago

I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of interns.

rimbo789 1y ago
Free labour, easy to dispose of labour? Even though it’s low quality at that price point it can’t be beat. That’s the only use I have ever seen.
siva7 1y ago
Oh he is understanding the abuse perfectly

rekenaut 1y ago

Traditionally, interns exist as a well-vetted and well-shaped supply of labor (which is very difficult to find through the traditional hiring process). The work they complete is secondary. Are companies going to stop needing good employees? Is nobody going to need to work in 40 years when all the current employees are phased out?

rimbo789 1y ago
If interns existed like that they haven’t in the 21st century. They are a free disposable short term labour to be ripped through. Also what company do you know of thinks in 40 year terms? The longest budgeting process I’ve been part of has been 3 years and the year 3 numbers were understood to be pure wish fulfilment
- mothballed 1y ago
  I'm not sure when interns stopped being part of the hiring chain, but I remember almost universally circa 2010 or 2011 in the great recession, almost every single intern and co-op student I knew were told bluntly there would be absolutely no hiring of them into full time roles. Up until the great recession it was pretty normal, almost expected, that a good internship turned into a good job offer. I'm guessing that just never reversed.
- _se 1y ago
  That's precisely how most companies use interns. You have no idea what you're talking about.

nicce 1y ago

So what are the long term risks when senior staff leaves and those need to be replaced with new seniors that have never seen the existing work vs. promoting younger people who knows the projects and practises?

globular-toast 1y ago
Long... term... risk? What is this archaic concept? I just want to get into a position where I can extract rent from children when they grow up. Why do I need to worry about this so called long term risk?
- mothballed 1y ago
  >I just want to get into a position where I can extract rent from children when they grow up. That's called social security.
kypro 1y ago
These days normally what corporates do is bring in people from abroad who have the skills. The idea that companies would seek to train up domestic workers if there is a skill shortage is outdated today – even if theoretically this might be good for the domestic workforce. It's just cheaper and easier to import the skills needed.
- nicce 1y ago
  I think I disagree. It sounds like that companies that do this are average at most and has nothing own - otherwise it would not be possible to just replace the workers. If your company is average, it does not attract real talents. But maybe my comment was not noting every discipline. I was mostly thinking about software development.
  - kypro 1y ago
    I'm not talking about "replacing" workers. I'm talking about hiring the most qualified which in a global talent pool will almost always be someone from abroad. There's no reason for a company to hire a relatively unskilled graduate domestically when they could hire someone with more experience from abroad. If you look at the workforce makeup of many large tech companies today there's a reason Indian and East-Asian talent is so overrepresented, and it's not because they lack talent. It's because if you actually want to hire the best of the best you're not going to bring in juniors from the domestic workforce and train them up.

ddddang 1y ago

[dead]