Hacker News Reader

Comment by twoquestions | Hacker News Reader

Stated differently, "Google commits $1B to flood the market with newbie tech workers, and to grow future client businesses".

The cynic in me can clearly see their interest in the effects of this grant, but thinking on it more that interest might serve us better in the long run. I just hope the community gains from that money before it makes it's way back to Google.

View on HN

Even if it's self interest, at least good to see a company thinking in very long term self interest. This aligns incentives much better with the common good.

For a long time the anti-H1B segment has been critical of Big Tech for trying to undercut American tech workers instead in investing in citizens. So now they're investing in the wrong citizens?

Hardly, especially if they execute aggressively on the "grow future client businesses" bit.

I'll admit that part of my suspicion is rooted in self-interest, but if demand for my labor grows faster than other people can supply it I'll still win out (along with many others).

Abundance of cheap labor allows to "grow future client businesses", not the other way around. Cheap labor is key here, no matter where it comes from.

I swear, many of the HN crowd seems like they'd be happiest if they were the only developer on the planet.

Well obviously, think of how well I'd be paid! /s

You should ask taxi drivers about how they feel about millions of people getting paid peanuts to drive for Lift and Uber.

Or lawyers about how they feel about millions of people with law degrees unable to find work as lawyers.

Or Physics PHDs about how they feel driving a cab^wUber.

Or musicians, who live off selling t-shirts.

Why do you think supply and demand does not apply to the IT labour market?

Because labor generates additional demand. There isn't fixed demand for software engineers that persists across all time. The demand for engineers has grown over the last fifty years.

There are a LOT of people in tech who are really insecure about their own jobs. They see any move like this as a plot by bigcorp to undermine their job prospects.

Training kids to code? Yup..threat to their own job.

>There are a LOT of people in tech who are really insecure about their own jobs.

If the rest of the job market looked like it did in the 1950s, sure - no problem. I don't see any reason to feel particularly secure when this is what's going on outside of tech though:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/28/adjunct-prof...

>They see any move like this as a plot by bigcorp to undermine their job prospects.

Either tech bigcorp is concerned about their bottom line or they aren't. If they are, then wouldn't it be economically rational to try and reduce their largest expense - developer wages?

I wonder sometimes if people are really naive enough to think that Mark Zuckerberg is trying to "reform immigration" or "get CS taught in primary schools" out of the goodness of his heart.

What does the plight of adjunct professors have to do with the job market for software professionals?

>I wonder sometimes if people are really naive enough to think that Mark Zuckerberg is trying to "reform immigration" or "get CS taught in primary schools" out of the goodness of his heart.

First a non sequitur and now a strawman? I don't think Zuckeberg lets me use facebook out of the goodness of his heart either...

>What does the plight of adjunct professors have to do with the job market for software professionals?

I see tens of thousands of (often desperate) people trying to get in to the profession because that's what it's like on the outside.

So far demand has outstripped supply, but I can see demand collapsing if/when VC dries up and demand remaining the same while people continue to flood in to the profession.

That is, over time, I expect the job market for software professionals to end up more like the job market for adjunct professors than vice versa.

>First a non sequitur and now a strawman? I don't think Zuckeberg lets me use facebook out of the goodness of his heart either...

Right. So you think Facebook is run for advertising dollars and his other "charitable" ventures (e.g. to reform immigration) are run as an attempt to undermine developer wages?

...which will depress the wages of everyone on HN reading these words. Especially entry level engineers or those without CS degrees.

"Coding bootcamps" are the new DeVry IT program of the 2010s.

It seems like the more IT workers we have the more IT workers we need. When I started in IT, a starting programmer made about the top scale of a teacher. Now a starting programmer makes about 175% of a top scale teacher. At least in the Mid-West.

What people tend to forget is that Google and others were involved in anti-poaching deals that kept the wages of workers down. What people don't realize is that this affected you whether you worked for Google or some company competing with Google. After all, if they could match Google's artificially lower salary, or get near it, they were good. Those actions hurt everyone in the industry.

While it's great they are working to train workers, it's not hard to imagine them having a conversation about this regarding lowered salaries.

Exactly. Instead of colluding to artificially depress wages, flood the market with trainees to naturally and legally accomplish the same end.

I understand your instant skepticism, but I think it's misplaced here.

This is a billion dollars going to nonprofits to help people level up their skills.

While Google should benefit indirectly from this, their investment will also help countless other enterprises and individuals.

This is badly needed, so I'm going to suppress my reflex to twist the story against Google and celebrate the fact that they're taking concrete action.

Show me another company doing anything similar.

But will google employ any of these employees or is it just presentism

They could instead pay taxes instead of stashing cash overseas.

I saw it totally differently. The recent election showed me that there are huge amounts of untapped labour across the US, but they lack to capital to elevate themselves. To me, this was google saying "hey, we don't need to import people for tech, we can just home grow them"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com