5 ms·

We won’t hire anybody moving forward who doesn’t have hands-on agentic programming experience. We’re in the traditionally slower moving GovTech space. I have to

by cebert 7mo ago

We won’t hire anybody moving forward who doesn’t have hands-on agentic programming experience. We’re in the traditionally slower moving GovTech space. I have to imagine this is now a common expectation in many sectors. Teams where I work can use Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and Copilot CLI. Internally, it seems like Claude Code and Codex are the more popular tools being used by most software teams. If you’re new to these tools, I highly recommend trying to build something with them during your free time. This space has evolved rapidly the past few months. Anthropic is offering a special spring break promotion where you can double the limits on weeknights and weekends for any of its subscription plans until the end of March.

nitink23 7mo ago
Random question but what are some issues your facing with these ? I am just curious because everyone in my org uses them but act like it doesn't bring them any productivity gains probably they are scared to admit that it's actually been super helpful otherwise they are out of a job.
- cebert 7mo ago
  > Random question but what are some issues your facing with these ? I’ve seen some folks who are quite productive with these tools, but there is a lot more slop too. On my team on same the code base you see two different team members producing vastly different results.
  - embedding-shape 7mo ago
    > On my team on same the code base you see two different team members producing vastly different results. And if they use LLMs to assist, does the same thing happen?
georgemcbay 7mo ago
> We won’t hire anybody moving forward who doesn’t have hands-on agentic programming experience. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me even as someone who uses agentic programming. I would understand not hiring people who are against the idea of agentic programming, but I'd take a skilled programmer (especially one who is good at code review and debugging) who never touched agentic/LLM programming (but knows they will be expected to use it) over someone with less overall programming experience (but some agentic programming experience) every single time. I think people vastly oversell using agents as some sort of skill in its own right when the reality is that a skilled developer can pick up how to use the flows and tools on the timescale of hours/days.
- dlivingston 7mo ago
  Right. Using Claude Code & friends is not some esoteric skill that needs years in the trenches to learn which magical incantations to utter. You prompt it. That's it. Yes, there are better and worse ways of prompting; yes, there are techniques and SKILLs and MCP servers for maximizing usability, and yes, there are right ways to vibe code and wrong ways to vibe code. But it's not hard. At all. And the last person I want to work with is the expert vibe coder who doesn't know the fundamentals well enough to have coded the same thing by hand.
- furyofantares 7mo ago
  Yeah, will they take someone who has two months of hands-on with Claude Code, just not someone with zero? Come on, I'll take a great programmer with zero who knows they need to use it over a mediocre programmer who's been doing it since Claude Code released and I expect to be better off for doing so within 2 weeks.
- dasil003 7mo ago
  I suspect it’s not about agentic coding being a special skill, and more about why a competent programmer wouldn’t have tried it by this point, and whether that is a sign of ideological objections that could cause friction with the team. Not saying I agree with that thinking, but I definitely see why a hiring manager could think that way.
  - bitwize 7mo ago
    If you aren't taking advantage of it, you are not a competent software engineer in 2026.
    - bigstrat2003 7mo ago
      On the contrary. That's the only kind of competent software engineer in 2026. Competent engineers don't hand things off to the tool that generates terrible code really quickly.
    - tantivy 7mo ago
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
array_key_first 7mo ago
If you're technically competent, as in you can program pretty well, you can pick up agentic programming fast. Like, in a week, max. And I don't mean be okay-enough. I mean be just as good as people who have been agentic coding this whole time. And, at the end of the day, a person who can program will be better at agentic coding after a couple days than someone who cannot program who has been agentic coding for a year. Agentic coding is just not all that complicated. It's a deep rabbit hole, sure, but figuring out how to prompt an AI is not that complicated. The harness can be, the skills might be, the subagent architecture maybe. But your organization should be standardizing that stuff. I would hope to God. Catching someone up to speed is very quick. But, if you hire good engineers, you will be have a competently engineered product. That has always been the case and will continue to be the case. If you hire sales people and product managers, it will not. Again, that's always been the case.

by cebert 7mo ago

nitink23 7mo ago

Random question but what are some issues your facing with these ? I am just curious because everyone in my org uses them but act like it doesn't bring them any productivity gains probably they are scared to admit that it's actually been super helpful otherwise they are out of a job.

cebert 7mo ago
> Random question but what are some issues your facing with these ? I’ve seen some folks who are quite productive with these tools, but there is a lot more slop too. On my team on same the code base you see two different team members producing vastly different results.
- embedding-shape 7mo ago
  > On my team on same the code base you see two different team members producing vastly different results. And if they use LLMs to assist, does the same thing happen?

georgemcbay 7mo ago

> We won’t hire anybody moving forward who doesn’t have hands-on agentic programming experience. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me even as someone who uses agentic programming. I would understand not hiring people who are against the idea of agentic programming, but I'd take a skilled programmer (especially one who is good at code review and debugging) who never touched agentic/LLM programming (but knows they will be expected to use it) over someone with less overall programming experience (but some agentic programming experience) every single time. I think people vastly oversell using agents as some sort of skill in its own right when the reality is that a skilled developer can pick up how to use the flows and tools on the timescale of hours/days.

dlivingston 7mo ago
Right. Using Claude Code & friends is not some esoteric skill that needs years in the trenches to learn which magical incantations to utter. You prompt it. That's it. Yes, there are better and worse ways of prompting; yes, there are techniques and SKILLs and MCP servers for maximizing usability, and yes, there are right ways to vibe code and wrong ways to vibe code. But it's not hard. At all. And the last person I want to work with is the expert vibe coder who doesn't know the fundamentals well enough to have coded the same thing by hand.
furyofantares 7mo ago
Yeah, will they take someone who has two months of hands-on with Claude Code, just not someone with zero? Come on, I'll take a great programmer with zero who knows they need to use it over a mediocre programmer who's been doing it since Claude Code released and I expect to be better off for doing so within 2 weeks.
dasil003 7mo ago
I suspect it’s not about agentic coding being a special skill, and more about why a competent programmer wouldn’t have tried it by this point, and whether that is a sign of ideological objections that could cause friction with the team. Not saying I agree with that thinking, but I definitely see why a hiring manager could think that way.
- bitwize 7mo ago
  If you aren't taking advantage of it, you are not a competent software engineer in 2026.
  - bigstrat2003 7mo ago
    On the contrary. That's the only kind of competent software engineer in 2026. Competent engineers don't hand things off to the tool that generates terrible code really quickly.
  - tantivy 7mo ago

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

array_key_first 7mo ago

If you're technically competent, as in you can program pretty well, you can pick up agentic programming fast. Like, in a week, max. And I don't mean be okay-enough. I mean be just as good as people who have been agentic coding this whole time. And, at the end of the day, a person who can program will be better at agentic coding after a couple days than someone who cannot program who has been agentic coding for a year. Agentic coding is just not all that complicated. It's a deep rabbit hole, sure, but figuring out how to prompt an AI is not that complicated. The harness can be, the skills might be, the subagent architecture maybe. But your organization should be standardizing that stuff. I would hope to God. Catching someone up to speed is very quick. But, if you hire good engineers, you will be have a competently engineered product. That has always been the case and will continue to be the case. If you hire sales people and product managers, it will not. Again, that's always been the case.