Thus we're now seeing the rise of Professional Interviewers or Professional Leetcoders. I am ashamed to admit that I too, am one, and probably will continue to be one until I make it into such an "endgame" company.
Thus we're now seeing the rise of Professional Interviewers or Professional Leetcoders. I am ashamed to admit that I too, am one, and probably will continue to be one until I make it into such an "endgame" company.
Our craft is becoming arcane: Microsoft is building VSCode for the cloud. Few people own desktop computers anymore. Apple is locking down MacOS to signed binaries. Soon we'll all have thin clients and will write software in the cloud for the cloud. Few will be able to learn how to engineer at home anymore - you'll have to go to a university or trade school. Building a simple website will require JS package management, kubernetes, and AWS. The "free tier" will fall away.
Employees aren't excited by what they do: People job hop for promos, raises, and resume fodder, not because there's an actual interest in the product. The majority of software projects are mundane glue, pipes, optimization tweaks, or migrations.
Companies don't care about employees: Wages are adjusted for cost of living. Companies are trying to hire more outside of California in order to lower wages across the board. Employees at "passion project" companies (gaming, SpaceX, Tesla) are overworked and underpaid.
Incentives are wrong: Google bestows promos on launches, not KTLO. Google kills products that make customers and engineers happy and doesn't spend enough effort to make them better.
The industry is eating the commons: The web is turning into shit. Devices are being locked down. Ads and tracking are everywhere. Open source is being co-opted, but the benefits are not returned. The cool things to hack on and integrate with (remember "mashups"?) are all siloed up, full of ads, and dumbed down to the most basic products.
The Internet now treats everyone using it like we're all brainless idiots to be injected with dopamine. Like we're not smart enough to choose how to consume it. And working for companies in this field now feels like working for the insurance industry. Optimize for the average.
But I'd like to offer a little glimmer of hope from someone with too many gray hairs to count.
Computers are still machines, and we still tell them what to do by programming them. It is still possible to stay out of what you describe above, it is still possible to work on low-level code, on real products, on things that matter to people and companies.
The reality though is that the mundane things are where the money is though. While we all enjoy "cool" things, millions of companies need their accounting and payroll running, their truck drivers planned, their work schedules planned, ...
So you might find that more interesting things happen in e.g. industrial engineering companies or electronics companies, more so than in web companies. It's an entirely different world than what you describe above.
Hackaday might be a more interesting hangout than Hacker News for you ? So let's not lose our excitement and sense of wonder, after all it's all bits and bytes and we tell them how to behave.
The Hackaday focus on the dumbed-down format of video presentation is infuriating. It would be very nice to fund something community-driven, focused on actual content, with the same subject.
Until then, I think the few articles on the Hackaday subject that appear here on HN are worth more than the entire Hackaday site.
(I still visit both, of course, but tend to only look at the headlines there.)
Yes it is possible, but in practice one will (sometimes have to) spend most of the time with devices/technologies that make one die inside a little.
Part of the problem is that "doing the right thing" is often not competitively viable.
This may not be specific to IT only, either.
Exactly. It’s wild the potential that many of us hold.
I'm an eighties whizz-kid, educated hardware and software background with borderline epiphanic understanding of computer technology. From firmware to systems where peoples lives literally depend on. In 2000 jumped on a plane to Taiwan to develop the first Arduino/RaspberryPi class devices. Still up to date and currently busy polishing a ShowHN which will blow you off your socks.
Everything nowadays is shrink-wrapped out-of-the-box, hidden behind layers of frameworks. Programming languages becoming a fashion statement. Everyone seems to copy-paste stack-overflow and even then the answers are like "Why?" because it seems nobody reads specifications.
But...
Finding a job position is impossible. The excuses for rejection range from unbelief to insulting. It is so bad that I have now seriously considered leaving the field, taking 40+ years experience with me.
Please don't. We need more people like you to infuse much needed energy in a field/profession that is becoming mundane and steadily going downhill day by day.
I was once rejected because I did not know inane crap like what "this" is bound to at the top-level in JavaScript. Their answer: "the window object". a) Yeah, okay, if your code only runs in the browser. But not nodejs. And b) if anyone uses a top-level "this" it's an instant reject in code review from me.
Ultimately, a lot of these interviewers are waving huge warning flags saying "stay away!"
Even FAANG. Every single algorithm there is a "trick" to it. Once you memorize that trick, every leetcode becomes trivial. But it took a guy like Knuth some 30 fucking years to come up with that "trick". It's so goddamn stupid memorizing bubble sort when every language has a built in sort you're going to use. And if you ever see a developer writing their own algorithm for bubble sort at work, you're going to think something is wrong with this person. What the fuck are you doing guy? You're going to get it wrong and there is a library for all of this, used by thousands of people with hundreds of bug fixes.
Stay curious.
Before you do, are you up for a Zoom call or something? Talk about anything you're passionate about, and perhaps we'll post it as a show HN.
I'm 31 myself and at the beginning of my career (I've been longer in the education system than most).
My email is in my profile.
What's your email? I'd love to reach out to you and discuss some openings that we have on our team.
Worse yet is when the business minded masquerade "Fun" activities as them still being cool such as hackathons. The sad truth of the matter is that this is what happens in a maturing industry. A lot of the green field money that sat around for Facebook and Google to gobble up has been eaten. The remaining scraps are enough to prop up small startups, but really only until they get absorbed into the giants with fat checks for the founders. The regular workers get conformed into the system, with assurances "Everything will totally stay the same" as they slowly change everything.
Businesses exist to make people money. Engineers are great at solving problems and innovating. Business people are great at squeezing every last drop from those solutions till only a husk remains. To be fair to the business people, myself included, if you do anything less than squeeze for money as hard as you can, you get beat out by the competition who copy you, and nothing is as not fun as being jobless. The more and more people who get coding knowledge the more and more being a coder will be just like every other engineering position. Someone who executes. Which is why I bailed and got into PM so I could actually have a strong say to the business in what we execute on.
To end on a happy note I have never seen more people getting into robotics clubs, trying to make small static sites, learning the basics, and I am certain that every day more and more people are running their first hello world programs. So I think there some ups and downs to everyone learning coding.
Edit: better sentence formation.
And here I am, writing a desktop native app that targets a small niche of users, with no marketing, no advertising, and we've had our strongest year yet, and overall usage just grows slowly year over year.
Maybe it's how you think things ought to be that is misaligned with reality, rather than "the decline of the Roman Empire".
Now of course, if by "household" you meant "the entire niche of audio software", then sure. Or maybe even more broadly, "the entire niche of creative software", then even more sure.
But these are not tiny niches, even if they are small.
What is it?
Every week, more or less, someone tells me that Ardour is a piece of shit, and someone else tells me it's the best DAW they've ever used. I gave up believing that any given DAW could ever make everyone happy about a decade ago.
Lower labor costs mean lower costs passed on to the end users which means more products in the wild which means a bigger industry. It's only a problem if you're worried about being out-competed by "those hicks in the flyover states".
Techies complaining about companies moving out sounds a lot like the guy who worked the UAW system for 30yr so he could land a buddy position where he does nothing for $60/hr complaining about non-union factories and companies moving to Mexico. In both cases it's a tacit acknowledgement that the gravy train is unsustainable.
Yeah wages might be slightly lower in 40yr but that's a reflection of the difference between being an electrician in 1910 vs being an electrician in 1950 after the last of the line shaft industries had long been converted, once all the heavy lifting and low hanging fruit has been picked there's just a lot less cash sloshing around driving up prices and wages. The people who just want to be mediocre and punch a clock will still make a decent wage but the difference is that mediocrity and job hopping aren't enough to make you big bucks in a stable industry like they are in a rapidly growing industry flush with cash. In a stable industry you actually have to be worth the big bucks.
Which does suggest that someone going into software just for the money or, as GP or so commented, going through the motions and spending all their time prepping for Google interviews may be chasing a pretty transitory target.
Historically there's very little to suggest that the segment of one profession that's largely in one geographic area can sustainably capture super-premium compensation even though it doesn't really require a higher level of skill than many others have throughout the country (and the world).
And the fact that a lot more flexibility in living location has come in essentially overnight means that a lot of companies are going to start looking more skeptically at some of the premiums they're paying.
What did happen is a ton of people lost their jobs and those people, passionate about what they do, kept right on doing it in the form of open source software. Google, flush with cash, hovered up talent for bargain basement prices. The board room got the message that software was eating the world and if they didn't do something quick the people to wrote the software and built the systems might want a say in how those companies were run. So they outsourced what they could and doubled up what they couldn't. The message was clear. I don't need you. I've got a second one of you ready to go. The waged a war on GPL calling it "viral" and "insidious" and convinced everyone it would be much better to use more liberal licenses that would allow them to build and sell products.
The war was lost when they convinced you that management was "icky" and you didn't want that boring old stuff. You wanted to be coding so they hired the MBA to be the scrum master. The result is you were cut out of the decision making process. Your only input was on a technical level and even there you were kept a close eye on. Some people would even proudly exclaim that they liked this system because they thought they were winners based on their slightly higher than average salary all the wile cranking out multi-million or even billion dollar software for someone else. Doug Cutting, the creator of Hadoop and basically everything that was to become Cloudera was only given a job. They made so much money even they were embarrassed but only embarrassed enough to allow him to keep working for them.
You lost and they won and this is the result. You're made to jump through these absurd hoops because it's cheaper to create these pathological systems and waste your time than to do something more efficient.
Maybe the only way out of this mess is for business schools to start teaching new metrics for the latter category.
This could turn out to be a very good thing for the country. It's a social & economic problem if all the money & opportunity are squeezed into just one metro.
Once you cross the hump to not seeking physical proximity when seeking to minimize labor costs, there's very little reason to go to the rest of the US once you leave the SFBA.
The country it's good for isn't the US.
You might think of HP as a California company but they had large engineering hubs all over the country.
Look at the job listings for US tech company EMEA HQs. It's almost all sales and legal. Occasionally a pre-sales Engineer position comes up.
Meanwhile, they are hiring dozens of Devs at their US HQ.
Or, probably more accurately, it is a slippery slope, but not a very steep one. I do believe that jobs (and wages) are going to get distributed differently in the future. But, I'm hopeful that it'll be an improvement over having every high-paying job be in the same 5 dystopian cities.
I would say is that a lot of hard problems (of last 20-30 yrs) are getting commoditised (e.g. S3, DynamoDB, Redis) and barrier to entry reduced. This would mean increasing the work is "glue & pipes".
Heck, as far back as 2010 I got a promo at Google because I was the only one on the Google Maps data team (or the org) who wanted to keep the data up to date. (Also the only one who wanted to live in Seattle -- which might as well have been Siberia to them.) So they shipped me up there and gave me a team. It was like somewhere, deep down, they knew it was a good idea, but each person could forcefully argue why it wasn't -- so that it didn't have to be them.
It was great! Well, other than encountering more of the famously toxic culture, where people get promoted for being smart but nasty. But I'm sure that little problem has been solved.
Yes devices can do less than 10 years ago (less arbitrary thing), but they can also do more than 10 years ago. Of course the market in this segment might give you the feeling that everything is dumbed down. These devices are not used solely by very smart people. The most basic of all humans has a phone nowadays. And If apple decides to make MacOS only run singed binaries. That shows that they are targeting people who do not know how to run arbitrary code safely. I am a programmer and when I have to do that I have to think really hard. If my main PC runs stuff that I would rather not like to leave my house. I have to set up a VM and check it beforehand. You still have Linux to do whatever you want.
If people in the job market and Open Source community are getting exploited, it is only a matter of time until something develops to create a force against the exploitment. There are unions (at least there should be) and there are multiple ways to fund Open Source nowadays (Patreon, Gitcoin, Bountys,...).
It doesn't seem to me as everything is moving backwards. It is getting harder to live out the freedom of the individual. But on a macro level, I think things are moving forward.
Technology was made accessible for the masses. That means 100 IQ people. And then it was refined so the 85 IQ people could work most of it. I have no doubt that if you gave standardized IQ tests to every reader of Hacker News, you would not see much of an overlap with the bell curve of the American, or even world, population.
The people coming here are generally very technical, very smart (I'm defining this as at least one standard deviation above the norm, so 115 and higher IQs).
Most people aren't going to build their own enormous media server from used enterprise gear. Most people aren't going to build their own home surveillance system even though the hardware and open-source software out there exists. I could list another hundred projects for which we have specialized "consumer-friendly" devices.
Watch the YouTube video where Jordan Peterson talks about working with an 85 IQ individual and how it was a struggle for that person to consistently and accurately fold a sheet of paper into thirds and put it into an envelope. And now realize that for many of you, that's someone for which you're developing.
Have we generally proven otherwise?
Any technology that you want to see enormous widespread adoption of, has to be usable by some of those people.
And believe me, no business-minded person wants to throw a billion potential customers to the wayside. They want to simplify the technology to capture those dollars.
Sorry if this offends sensibilities of anyone, but I guarantee you if you could get inside the heads of a lot of these billionaires and multi-millionaires, you'd hear the same shit I'm telling you right here. The reason I know this is because my Uncle is one of those people. Smart. Ruthless. And has absolutely no qualms about exploiting people of lower intelligence.
Don't think for a minute that the SV crowd is any different.
I spent the last 5 years quite happy at a simple dev shop. Then they hired a bunch of people, paid them more than me, and allowed them complete free reign to write what ever kind of code on some brand new projects. After a year of this, one person quit mid-project, another died mysteriously (covid?), and then another just recently quit. My boss expected me to just pick up the slack on these three projects that were written in the most arcane and buffoon way possible. I basically just said no, and left. I had already been driven half insane over the year just trying to figure out the crap they were committing.
This was in the spring and I'm still unemployed. I'm mostly Java and some older languages, and was really looking forward to jumping onto python and django. But it's been a struggle really learning django good enough to interview for without any good experience behind me. I have a family and on top of covid issues and this year in general, sitting at home trying to learn a giant web framework is not very motivating when I could be spending it with my family (which were already severely affected by all my time I "wasted" going above and beyond at my last job for 5 years).
I just recently did an interview for a small django shop that didn't even test on django. Instead, I was given a half page of python code and asked to "fix" the problems. No requirements or tips. There was a syntax error, a bug, and a few cosmetic things.. I managed to find 8. All this while being stared at over Zoom. I was informed that "junior" devs can find 10-12 "problems", but they only hire those that "find" more than 18 (apparently 25 is the max).
I still got the code and look at it every now and then. Half a page of code that does nothing but take a list of "item" objects and print out an aggregate of a total price by item type. A loop over nothing but:
total[item.type] += item.cost
Of course there was some random data mangling above and below that, but that is the logic. Find the problems?! Should I raise errors or use a namedtuple or defaultdict? Half a page of code that could have just been a Select/Group by in SQL. No senor dev should be summing data like that. Sadly they said the code was from "production". They have "interviewed" over a hundred people in this year and hired only 1. All this for $45/hr 1099.In the beginning, I briefly thought I could use my savings to start some kind of business, not sure what. But I've blown most of that just paying the bills while I "interview".
I used to love software and would dream and breath it. But I've never been so unmotivated over these last 6 months. I'm debating on just applying at a local small town municipal IT job for $30 an hour. Giving up basically. Just show up at 8am, answer the phone mindlessly for IT "problems" and tell people to try restarting their windows machine (at least 3 times minimum) and screw of playing solitaire the rest of the day. But it seems so pointless and waste of a life. But even that doesn't motivate me, but just makes me more depressed and even slower going.
I don’t actually know what to say as encouragement but I do feel for you :(
I was in a similar position to you on your last job, and after looking at every single company I could think of in my city (London) I ended up finding just one that seemed good in all possible counts...
Maybe there is a company out there that you’d like to work for? My approach was to filter by the product, and only look into working for companies whose end product I thought was good and interesting.
Best of luck and don’t give up!!
Don't give up. And for the love of all that is holy, don't work municipal IT, it would only demotivate you further. Keep at it, improve your skills and keep applying.
You have a very holier-than-thou view of small scale IT work. There are a whole lot of problems to be solved at this level, many of them created by the people working the positions you're currently interviewing for.
It’s just incredibly demotivating to hear all the self-professed hot shots shit all over your past 10 years of delivering unambiguous value because you don’t know that [] === ‘’ is true in Javascript.
I finally found a position that’s financially great, but it’s more in spite of their dev process than thanks to it.
Django is pretty easy to learn. Model view Etc in Python instead of Ruby. Not rocket science.
Building something you care about will force you to dig into the details and become enough of an expert in a few weeks to get in the door somewhere where your skills will be appreciated.
That probably won't be Facebook, Google, or the next Silicon Valley unicorn. But there are a lot of other places and other Industries where interesting things are going on.
Good luck
It happens. It’s a strong sign you want to work elsewhere anyway. The problem is one of finding the right Elsewhere.
Small correction here: The non-paying users are not their customers. So it’s understandable that they kill all products where they don’t have any ROI. As another user here put it recently: Ads are like a hose where money pours out. And they’re desperately looking for another such hose.
The late years of Rome is actually a great metaphor. We are suffering from human capital loss, and have signs of institutional collapse. A shock can destroy our institutions and throw us into something like the early Medieval period: much less wealthy at the beginning, and messy too, but fast growing and with a much higher ceiling than the previous age.
> Microsoft is building VSCode for the cloud. Few people own desktop computers anymore.
I heard the same thing in my early years about these newfangled HTML email clients. Email should be consumed using Pine or Eudora, just as God intended.
> People job hop for promos, raises, and resume fodder, not because there's an actual interest in the product.
Oh yeah. I did this for the first 15 years of my career. It was faster to get a promo by changing jobs. I didn't care where I worked, as long as the company name had prestige. I kind of still do, but I transfer internally. Same effect, but I get to keep my vacation accrual.
> Companies are trying to hire more outside of California
In my early years I worked for a company that used Russian developers for some non-critical parts because it was cheaper to fly someone out there once a quarter than it was to hire the staff in CA. This was before the massive rise of outsourcing in India. See the Dilbert cartoons about Elbonia for more.
> The web is turning into shit.
Heard the same argument about MySpace. And Geocities before that. And AOL before that.
While there are some things that are even more latency sensitive, I think that could become a very small niche in the near future.
Maybe the problem isn't that it's impossible per-se but that the consumer-grade services underprovision their machines/bandwidth, or that consumer-grade gigabit fiber isn't actually that good (or problems in the "last mile" like using Wi-Fi instead of good old Ethernet)?
People who classify themselves as "hardcore gamers" perhaps, but those people will also drop upwards of $1000 on a graphics card. They're not the majority in gaming. Most people will happily play a game even if there are a few problems if it's cheap and entertaining.
You can say what you want about the business model or Google itself, but the UX is impeccable.
I am periodically in disbelief when I think that what I’m playing on the screen is being streamed by a server.
And, as a TO for fighting games, there's no substitute there for the barest minimum latency possible (to the point where older games legitimately feel better because you can play them over analog connections to a CRT).
I'll grant: it's impeccable under the right network conditions.
But cloud games have an advantage too and maybe we'll see new kinds of games/experiences that are not possible with local PCs.
Welcome to the other 99% of humanity. Work sucks, but someone has to do it.
Building a simple website is easier and cheaper now than it ever was.
When I was a kid, I dreamed of being able to have my own domain name and an account on a shared server where I could run CGI scripts. Now most people who can afford a laptop can afford to host their own website on a virtual server.
California isn't the industry...
The big lockin is network pricing. No egress fees when their data is already in S3. You have to run where the consumer has their data or you eat that network transfer as overhead for your SAAS.
I see GitHub slowly charging for egress downloads as the next lockin. You "save" by paying for builds on Azure.
I will own a desktop computer until the day I die.
Excellent post too.
Gamers will buy every RTX3xxx card that hits the shelf and every heavy duty programmer I know has at least a fast desktop and often server racks.
I don't think we need to worry about the future of the desktop just yet.
I responded with, "Whatever you guys buy - Dell, Lenovo. A 14" laptop and an external monitor would be fine."
He torted, "I've never seen anyone be productive on a laptop. Nobody here uses laptops. I'll get you a desktop with 2 monitors."
After I started, I notice he did almost all of his work from a conference room, using a Surface Book remoted into a desktop in his office.
I feel kind of guilty now though, because I actually managed to get hired at a really good company a few years ago, but I can't work up the motivation to put in as much effort as I did before. Now I'm the one coasting (still not schmoozing though), and see other new people making the same mistake I did.
I try to target obscure projects that I already know how to do, where there's an assumption that nobody really knows how to do it because it's obscure. Complexity and obscurity are great cover. Picking up legacy projects on old tech is a good way to do this. "Oh no, PHP sucks! Nobody's touched this code in years! Not to worry, give me a couple of days I'm sure I'll figure it out." Now my estimate is 3x longer than it would be if I was working in the areas under normal development.
I've also got my notifications pretty dialed-in so I never appear absent when someone needs me. I prevent slack from marking me idle. I turn my notifications to a more aggressive setting when I want to take a nap.
Nobody knows how long it takes to get a piece of code working, not even other programmers, so who cares if it takes a week instead of a day. Sometimes I keep a local branch that's represents my actual work and a second branch for pushing to the team. If I get in "flow" and want to get something done in a block of many hours, I can drip-feed the commits over a couple of days instead of dropping a PR at 2am and having everyone think I'm free to work on something else tomorrow. With a little shell scripting, I can make commits and push on a timer too, which is sometimes useful if I need to "work late" because everyone is stressed.
When something blows up in prod, I put in the extra hours with a good attitude. That helps create the perception that I'm the go-to person for things and a team player, so it's not surprising to anyone if I'm running a little late on a deliverable because I had to drop everything and help with something important (another way to add more buffer). I also try to pair sometimes, especially with new coworkers, so that they can see me working in short bursts. Pairing serves as a psychological anchor that I must work that way all the time. After all, I don't want people thinking I'm lazy.
Sometimes mistakes happen and I do get stuck working an 8 hour day, but those mistakes would have been 16 hour days if I wasn't actively avoiding doing as much work as possible.
As much as I can stomach it, I try to use the extra time to socialize with coworkers to help raise my visibility and build allies. That's the smart thing to do. In reality, I mostly play video games, do housework, and anxiously wait until work is "over" for the day so I can detach from my notifications.
Has tech turned me into a sociopath? Maybe. Do I feel like a prisoner in my own home? Certainly. But if I don't use this strategy, I'll constantly be over-committed, burned out, salty, and missing social connections with coworkers that are more valuable than the actual work.
I can't wait until I have enough money to be financially independent and never have to do this nonsense again.
Work your ass off when it's important, and just work otherwise. A valuable skill is distinguishing important from urgent
The management would say to everyone with performance below average something like: "How can we help you to improve your performance? What do you plan to improve your performance?"
The result was that most people stopped working once they reached their goals because otherwise they would only increase the average^^
I read a lot during this job xD
There are a lot of people operating on that plan. Mostly it doesn't work out for them.
Play this forward ten years with a family to support and a mortgage which committed you to personal inflation and a track record of ...? You can absolutely fool people for a week or a year, but a decade of non-experience will stick out like a sore thumb. Experience compounds, and the one you describe is compounding down. Do this for ten years and you will be much less accomplished than you could be.
Being an excellent employee?
I understand your point, but I actually have been doing this for about 10 years now, and I consistently have improved my "career trajectory" by switching jobs when I start to feel that my coworkers are overachieving and throwing me under the bus. I look at it like a forcing function to switch jobs and get a raise.
I already had a decade of pre-work experience just from being a lifelong hacker, so it's not like I'm relying on my job to learn new technology. I don't have a fear of falling behind. If anything, I've noticed a huge decrease in SWE competence over my time in industry.
Some of my most "successful" friends at FAANGs are bad developers that just devote more time to playing the system than I am willing to do. I find the social con-man stuff to be really draining and I hate doing it. I also hate interviewing, which limited my career more than I'd care to admit.
Also, I've opted to not support a family or carry a mortgage. I'm doing something similar to FIRE. I'm hoping to be FI with a total of 15 years as a tech employee.
"But do you really hate working so much that you would sacrifice having children!?". Yes. Very yes.
It's also likely that tech workers are "overpaid" right now, as we're compartmentalizing more work, lowering the skills required to join tech companies, and remote work is now the norm. It's a race to the bottom, and I want out as soon as possible.
So, if less than 4 hours and whatever is left of my brain is enough for my company, that's all they'll get
Same thing with putting in extra effort at work. No reason to actually take on the extra hustle if it pays off minimally when all is said & done anyway. Better to say no thank you, I'd rather not take on a burden of effort-debt yet and wait till it makes significantly more sense to do so
One of my biggest fears is that by the time I can stop working, I won't have any will left to pursue passionate endeavors that would benefit society.
Even if I just didn't need to worry about health insurance cost, that would be enough to shorten my financial independence timeline by years.
If I had sufficient UBI to cover basic expenses for the year, I would quit right now.
Trying to get a promotion is deciding to compete for one position in one company with essentially every qualified candidate in the world. It’s easy to see how looking for a better job every so often has better odds for success.
Why do you consider it your endgame? Top salary? Interesting problems? Making a difference?
I wasn't a loser in my old career, and I don't want to be a loser in tech. But, it seems like everyone is a loser here. IT/Security is seen as a well-paid janitor; someone you need, but not someone you really care to learn about. Worse, becoming "important" in a company seems to be useful only in so far as you have sway at that particular company. ie, it's a lot of work for some very local, and very useless prestige. And worse, there's no external meaning other than your own status. Why do I care if I have a little fiefdom within company walls? Nothing worthwhile is being accomplished, it's just more sales.
I guess you just find the level you want to coast at. I haven’t won the start up lottery either. But I have been able to be fully employed as a contractor with a very good hourly rate for quite a long time. Which probably means I’m coasting right now. But I still manage to bump my rates up every so often, so maybe not.
Sometimes that means coasting and spending more time on your hobbies or with your family. Can’t see anything wrong with that.
If your work makes you an important person in the company, you have a strong basis for negotiation. Most people just don't use it...
often times companies will opt to pay more as a stop-gap until they find a cheaper replacement
They know the game, no employee ever is going to stay if they're being paid half their market value. "Commitment" my ass lol. But more to the point in order to replace you they have to pay market value for your job. They can only find someone cheaper if your job is beneath you.
Parlaying offers is fine as long as the work they need doing is worth that money. Who are they going to replace you with? Hiring is expensive even if they find a sucker. The only risk is if your market value is higher than they need to pay to get your job done.
Fundamentally the operative variable is: "can they get your job done for less than you're demanding." That's what matters, more than the impression of commitment.
1. read documents.
2. ask questions.
3 identify corner cases.
4. identify why the problem was hard
5. actually try out their code instead of just thinking about it.
One candidate used a very troublesome technique to try and solve it, and proudly declared, "I am sure this works". I knew it didn't - but it took me one hour to find the bug, and in order to find the bug I had to write a property test. This is SUPER dangerous behavior IMO. Code Reviews will not catch everything, so if you have a dishonest coder you can wind up in trouble. He got hired for another team "this is literally the best hash table I have ever seen".
Unfortunately all of the candidates were clearly folks who had practiced their leetcoder skills. Nobody completed the problem correctly. However, I was okay with partial answers that fulfilled some of the softer qualities I was looking for The other folks who were interviewing gave one of the candidates who bombed my part rave reviews. I got steamrolled into hiring him onto my team, and sure enough he didn't read documents, he didn't try out his code. In the month that I worked with him he did not push any code. I left.
I've been considering screening companies based on what their hiring process is. How do you think that could be assessed, say, companies that eveluate real-life experience vs. leetcoder skills?
Then I got invited to the onsite where I was subjected to multiple stereotypical leetcode rounds. Got rejected.
From the feel of this thread it seems to me that a company that explicitly states on "Who's Hiring" that they don't do leetcode, but do actual pair programming for evaluating candidates would have an advantage above the rest!
I interviewed at a few places at a senior/staff level, and most of my interviews were behavioral, architectural, or discussions about past work. The few leetcode-style or coding questions I had were easily prepared for from my ~40 hours of interview-specific coding prep.
There is zero chance I would have gotten those interviews or passed them without excelling at my job. My resume would have looked terrible if I didn't go above and beyond at my last role, and I would have given weak answers to some of the questions I was asked if I didn't have real experience with the subject matter or a relevant situation.
I think I understand why you have the perspective you have. Indeed, many modern software interviews can feel far removed from the actual job, and we all know that even well-executed interviews sometimes result in decisions barely better than a coin flip. However, unless you really enjoy leetcode, I can't think of anything more depressing than studying for interviews all day. Also, it is hard to prepare for interviews at higher levels (senior/staff) without actual experience produced by doing a good job.
Leetcode is "easy" to crack with some (considerable) amount of hard work and they know that. But you can't make up past experience in behavioral interviews as you get found out very quickly.
So maybe there's the gap between senior roles and mid/jr/new.
But my question then is, how are senior folks training/picking folks to replace them? It must not be happening in the interviews, maybe on the job?
Where did you find time to do 40 hours of prep, and how many weeks did it take?
Most people I know spend nights and weekends prepping for at least a month to a quarter.
Sure - but if you want to live in silicon valley, you will have to join FAANG or have startup riches (much more difficult) to have a "normal" life that you'd have elsewhere. You're not going to own a house in good school district with startup income.
If you live in BFE then whatever - maybe the 100%+ raise in income wouldn't affect your lifestyle. For most of us in SV, it has a very substantial increase in quality of life.
I feel precisely the opposite: if you work somewhere with people you like working with (and who like working with you) then you will start to get hired through your network, not through your mad leetcode skillz.
That's what networking really is, not "networking sessions" or various going through the motions you'll hear described in a seminar. It's simple human connections from people saying "Hey, I'd like to work with decafninja again" or "Oh, you need a frobnitz expert? You know, I know someone called decafninja who might be able to help you."
The people who would hire me without leetcode were either trying to take advantage of me or have never been my coworkers.
As another commenter said: Leetcode, leetcode, leetcode.
My last three interviews and job moves have all been from referrals or old colleagues. None had coding challenges and all resulted in job offers. But that was a small satellite team for a big org and two early stage startups.
It’s also a consequence of timing and luck though. I’d definitely be prepping harder for job hunting.
Also timeframe is significant too. I'd say 5-10 years ago, fewer companies (especially outside the tech industry) were leetcoding candidates. Now, many of those same companies (including my current) are all leetcoding candidates.
i used to like computers. not so much anymore.
The caveat to this is that he has to be extremely unpicky. Said job can be very undesirable other than the compensation - stuff like feeding XML feed files or working with VB, etc. But because they are at hedge funds, they all still pay well.
I'm not sure if it would still work though as I've been working for myself for 22 years. It seems hiring has turned upside down since I last interviewed.
It makes me wonder how much money I left on the table the last 10 years, because I went the route of great software engineer -> great interviewer, instead of great interviewer -> great software engineer.
Also, I have to say I really came to enjoy doing leetcode, and learned (really re-learned) a lot of interesting things.
At this point, you'll have many more tools in your kit (graph traversal, search, dynamic programming, queues, heaps, stacks, etc.) and you can work on coming up with your own solutions to new problems. But I found it to be a waste of time staring at a problem for hours when I didn't already have the fundamentals in place to tackle it.
The other thing I did was watch youtube videos to get a better grounding in some of the data structures that I struggled with. I mostly did this wish graphs, as I was always terrible at graph problems and never had to apply them in my career. I found this series of videos to be extremely good.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDV1Zeh2NRsDGO4--qE8y...
That part of just following the solution for the first 50-100 problems is spot on. It resonates very well with my experience learning math by first following the "solved" examples, fully understanding them, then solving similar "simple" problems, repeating them till they fit into muscle memory and only then attempting the challenging ones.
First challenge I faced with leetcode is they do not have a concept or technique map. Similar to the chapter index in any math textbook, each dealing with a specific technique, concept or pattern. For example the idea of using a hash to store a running sum is useful for a class of problems like finding the longest sequence that adds to a specified sum, longest sequence of equal no of 0s and 1s. Yet, there was and still isn't a page or resource where such a pattern was described.
Solving leetcode feels like swimming upstream, one problem at a time, looking for patterns. Some are well described (Kadane for example) but most aren't. I looked around the web but couldn't find any resources that helped me with this.
I wonder if we could, at your experience, list some concepts and techniques that can be repeatedly useful. I believe that could cut the prep time by a good degree.
Second related problem to this is retention. With this master technique map, it would become easier to review and revise quickly. (I tried spaced rep, not useful) The most effective strategy for me has been to put everything in one book.I have multiple index pages with lists of similar problems pointing the page numbers with the solution.
I have been able to get better at data structures using this approach now I'm at the leetcode phase.
Appreciate your response.
I'm really glad you bring it up, because I had actually been pondering ideas for making a better programming training site based on the idea of a skill graphs (similar to an RPG), repetition to build muscle memory, clear progress tracks based on the graph of skills, and greater insight into your strengths/weakness/progress with metrics.
As far as enumerating techniques, I'd need a good deal of time to work on that. I think there are two classes, the macro, being data structures/algorithms and what type of problems they apply. And the micro, which is more implementation specific techniques. Things like using a loop with two pointers into the same structure (ie: find a cycle in a linked list).
The key perspective shift from me was from - "I need to solve 200 leetcode problems before I can approach interviews with confidence" to - "Here are 50 techniques. Most solutions use a combination of these"
I started my journey splitting things into buckets (Arrays, Strings, Binary tree, BST, Stacks, Linked List, Matrix, Graphs, DP). I went through EPI and Leetcode populating those buckets. I started solving the easies for a month. Built a repo of questions and links so huge, it would take me years (really, years) to get through it sequentially. That was depressing and with no sense of immediate reward, gave up.
A few weeks later, I decided to reduce scope and focus only on Arrays, Strings, BST and Graphs. Turns out that isn't a great approach either as there are a lot of overlaps between Array and String problems and by the time I got to the string problem that used a technique similar to what I had used in a problem in Arrays, i'd forgotten most of it anyway. Repeated this a few time and it gave me the impression that I couldn't remember shit, I wasn't cut out for this and gave up, again.
My latest attempt is to focus on data structures (properties, strengths and tradeoffs) and techniques. This has been liberating so far but is a lot of work which drove me to look for resources adopting such a perspective and I found none. I believe its probably a lot of work (like you mention) but I wouldn't know unless I get through more problems. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I think if you hit a balance of problems that touch on arrays, strings, linked lists, trees, graphs, stacks, queues, heaps, and also some dynamic programming you'll be good to go. I found that companies really love to ask graph problems in disguise, and once you know how to recognize them and the basic DFS/BFS implementations you're golden. And if you get good at graph problems, trees and linked lists are simple, so I think it's a great area to put extra focus.
I found the dynamic programming problems particularly hard for my brain to grasp, and I had to spend a lot of time repeating the basic problems and slowly building up my skillset. A ton of practice, and I never even got asked a single DP question in all the interviews!
I imagine that strategy ( focus on weaker areas and be consistent) to work more reliably than making it a numbers game.
Appreciate your comments and hope you can see that training website through to a real product. Would benefit a lot of people like me.
And yes, many problems I solved 3 or more times. If you go to the discussion section, you'll see a number of different popular solutions by users. Try to understand and implement a few of them to get a greater understanding of the problem. Once you feel like you know the problem well, delete all your code, see if you can re-implement it in under 10 minutes, then try again for 5. Keep putting in those reps, you'll get faster.
Think about how fast you can write out a simple for loop. You probably don't even think about it, the code just "flows" out. That's because you've done it hundreds or thousands of times, your subconscious takes over. You can get to that point with more complex things like breadth first search, depth first search, dynamic programming, path finding, etc. you just need to get the reps in. It's a lot of work, but if you put in the time (try for a couple hours a day) you will see the results. And, once you start getting better, leetcode can become addictive like a game, which makes practice much easier.
I instead always suggest to do a good job regardless (note that doesn't mean doing long hours just working with care).
There are more important things than career ladder like integrity, honesty, work ethic and meaningful work.
Don't let societal policies compromise your inner values.
It is such a tragedy for our industry. Personally, I don't participate. And encourage everyone to opt out.
I want, and do, spend all my efforts in delivering best performing, most secure real products, making customers happy and the infrastructure and code maintainable. I have as much impostor syndrome as anyone (or probably more than most) but very slowly over many years and long string of managers who gush about my performance and always give me highest possible reviews, I've come to accept (if not actually believe) that I'm very good at what I do.
And yet, no way I could ever "pass" one of these whiteboard algorithm monkeydance interviews. A company wants to judge based on nonsense that has nothing to do with the job? Then you don't get to hire me, a proven expert with a track record of success. Enjoy hiring a team of people who've spent their life doing artificial exercises and (as a consequence) haven't put much effort into building actual products.
I do what I can to improve the industry hiring. I do interview lots of candidates and will never do so via whiteboard monkeydance. I interview based on their experience doing real work, based on the resume. I encourage everyone to do the same and put and end (at least slightly reduce) the leetcode nonsense that's killing the hiring culture.
Ultimately, intrinsic motivation won’t always make us rich, but it might help us be happy and fulfilled. And in the rare occasion that health, wealth and happiness all align, what a good life we can enjoy.
Here here!
That said, I’m still very talented and I’m not going to let it shake me. Y’all can have the rat race, I’ll go find myself a place I can be productive.
I’m at the point I’m seriously considering this, and I’m just not sure I can do it. Everytime I run through the possibilities in my head nothing adds up. The only viable careers for me to switch into are a) not interesting or b) pay depressingly little and would require me to obtain expensive credentials.
One of the jobs mentioned is free time rich and money OK, and the other I don't know what the payment is like, but would require credentials.
If you haven't worked in foodservice yet, I actually highly recommend it as an experience, at least in a short term sense.
And by doing so, it profits the employees too. If everybody has been around for 20+ years but stays really current, even just for the sake of the company, their employability stays high too! It's a win-win.
These rants about "I'm back on the job market and now have to re-learn coding" tend to be a strong sign of complacency. "I already went through this and now want peace and quiet, why am I being forced to learn something new?" Well, because the world is evolving. Keep evolving with it, or gradually disappear in obsolescence. If you don't then that's not just bad for your job chances but even for your company. You'd not want to work at a place that still uses VB6 just because it was hip 20 years ago when everybody was hired.
FWIW I work at a company where we are strongly encouraged to stay on top of the game so that we stay competitive in the market. That automatically keeps everybody employable.
Algorithms can be beautiful to code but most of the time is not spent on this sort of thing. It's fixing null pointer exceptions or parsing json requests or whatever javascript front end engineers do.
You definitely have to prepare.
This was about him having to learn C# since it wasn't really around 20 years ago. And having to polish up Python cause it was very different 20 years ago. And other programming practices. You definitely need to stay up to date on the stuff that's relevant to your job. Not because of interviews, but because .. it's your job. If you prepare for an interview and notice that's what's holding you back, then you definitely started to grow complaceny in your job. And maybe your environment made you become that way, then it's not a good environment.
If you are up to date on this, then writing a BFS from scratch or debugging a null pointer issue or even json will be a piece of cake. Interview questions are an excuse to have a technical conversation, not to see if you remember some algo from school.
After you've been in the industry for a while, you are likely to be referred for jobs by former colleagues, or even invited by those former colleagues to come and interview at their new companies.
If you excel at your job, your former colleagues will be more likely to do this, because they enjoyed working with you and want to work with you again. They very likely have no idea how good you are at Leetcode-style problems.
Then, once they put your name in, you get a Lettcode-style interview. That's the way every company I have worked for has worked.
If it's actually true--and if poor quality of work and reputation mean nothing, just leetcode--it seems like that is just a side effect of extremely rapid expansion and/or churn.
Because no employer would willingly hire people like that. That'd be absurd. So the only reason that would be possible if the hiring manager never got wind of someone's work ethic or quality. And it seems like that's only possible with enough disjointedness in the people network, combined with hiring practices that don't care about it.
1) Interview with any sort of success
2) Judge merit after getting the position
I think a lot more people may be operating on intuition than you realize.
I totally see the logic. But the problem with this is on day 1 of the new job where you've moved up a level by successfully completing Leetcode-style interviews, you're now expected to do more and know more. And that's hard if you've only invested the bare minimum in your previous job and haven't maximized your learning.
So now you need to not only give more than the bare minimum at your current job, you need to also constantly keep your Leetcode skills up to date.
I too, want to do everything you mention, but until I get past the leetcode gatekeepers, it doesn't matter.
That sums up very nicely. This reminds me of a quote:
"Passing an exam with good grades/marks only show that you are really good in passing the exam" -- By (don't remember)
Does it mean that CV credentials like "developed requirements for a complex system, built it from scratch and overcome significant technical challenges in doing so" don't mean anything, in your opinion? Because in my experience interviewing, things like this get a lot of attention, are discussed in depth and leave impression on the interviewer. I think that my results interviewing would be significantly worse if it was just "fixed bugs and did incremental improvements" instead.
But again, I have very little experience (or desire) interviewing at FAANGs of the world, may be they do things differently?
I worked my ass off at nameless orgs that were willing to hire a no-credential computer science graduate. Always going "above and beyond", built a reputation for getting things done, almost always delivered stuff on time, took ownership, covered up for changing and incomplete requirements, entertained last minute pivots, did what a team lead and architect should be doing even though was always paid as a dev.
This basically meant I spent late nights and weekends at home or office getting shit for work done. I've also on many occasions, put fires out in my own and other teams. I always got flattered in all my appraisals, with all my superiors including the CTO of our org.
Almost 10 years in, I feel fooled for not seeing the forest for the trees.
What a waste of time it all has been ! I get paid the highest that a non FAANG org is willing to pay for my skillset. I always get handed the harder, weirder things and it never ends.
I cannot clear these crazy interviews at these endgame orgs without a heavy investment of time grinding stuff of negligible value. Prepping now is an investment that will take months balancing family time and work load.
All I had to do a few years ago was just stop. Take a deep breath. Leetcode. Leetcode. Leetcode. Get into the weeds of my favorite language. Build a compiler. Get some research published in some journal or write a book or give some talks. Contribute to open source projects enough to get my name in. Schmooze a bit. Market myself more. And let the projects at work go fk itself ( They did end up that way anyway )
Would have paid off more than what my full time jobs have paid me for the last 10 years.
Edit: some comments seem to suggest they learnt a lot of their skills "on the job" and would not have landed their current dream job without it. I am strongly biased to believe there are more blue winged raccoons roaming around in this country than such people who got hired at FAANGs because of what the learned on the job at non-FAANG orgs.
All non-loss-making, salary-paying orgs use standard stacks with standard components in two or more enterprise-y languages glued together with a shit ton of in house coded garbage running in production with some standard relational DB. Go try to make your resume sparkle and stand out with that experience.
You spend enough time in these ecosystems in production and you see yourself keeping a safe distance from anything that is new, look at any new platform with skepticism and quickly realize how painful that upstream swim is to make fundamental changes in such environments. I still have scars to show from the time (among other fun times) I tried to get cassandra into our production systems only to later be told by the cassandra folks to "RTFM, before doing anything fancy" Its a full time job to keep those up and running not some skill a dev would pick up "on the job"
It's like a relationship, you'll never truly love the one you are with, if you keep dating or looking at others.
Plus, just a general poor moral value, IMHO.
Nowadays, at least in tech, quite a few people consider it a red flag. The world we now live in.
Unless you're close to retirement and don't really need the money, it's unlikely you'll know when you're there. Companies change and/or get into trouble, managers change, projects get canceled, etc. I've been at companies I spent quite a few years at and I still came close to quitting for various reasons (and eventually did). I'd submit there is no predictable endgame over more than a 2-3 year time horizon.
My current company was something I would have considered endgame at the start of my career. Now it's not.
A company I'd consider to be currently endgame (say, FAANG), may not be 10 years later.
For the sake of discussion, as I mentioned in my original comment, I would simply define an endgame company as one where I'd be satisfied staying for a while without further ambition about finding the next great thing. Where I'd be content doing a helluva great job and not even think about leetcode.
My best friend ended up at one of the FAANGs a few years ago and is doing exactly that. Although he is now afraid that his leetcode skills have atrophied and he'd fail interviews horribly if for whatever (involuntary) reason he ends up having to look for another job. But he has no short term intention of leaving and thus hasn't been grinding leetcode for a while.
My wife's best friend thought it stupid (actually, I agree - it is stupid). Then she started dating a SWE, who is apparently also leetcoding in his spare time.
Early this year I got good at these problems and the ones I would actually encounter, above the average (based on time to solve, efficiency), as well as the system design interviews and I honestly think the behavioral interviews too, but decision makers just do not want to pay me over $180k. Whether thats salary at a Series B, C or midsize company or big tech companies whose total comp would be closer to $400k alongside a slightly lower cash comp
I questioned my competency, how I come across and everything. I subsequently let recruiters push me at the $125k range and I got a lot of offers. It was like a totally different and endearing experience, just like I had seen earlier in my career at those and lower comp ranges
So instead I created and sold some digital currencies for 7 figures
I think I would still like the validation of doing a year or two in the big tech circuit, especially because I could earn the shares and write calls on them without risking my prior capital, while being less likely to incur liability or bring attention to myself like in entrepreneurial endeavors
But I really hate that people are not able to value my contributions accurately. In fact I dont think they are valuing that at all, it felt like people were expecting a different kind of person: more stereotypical unsociable programmer at the higher comp and experience ranges. But regarding experience I also did a resume variation with less years of experience.
You could possibly get away with that a few years ago when people were throwing a bunch of money away on vaporware ICOs, but it's getting cracked down on more now.
Token projects are just SaaS businesses with limited memberships that inherit transferability and settlement on a distributed ledger.
They're also extremely lucrative to sell in the primary market and the blockchain component sells itself.
I think if you are becoming a Professional Leetcoder, you’re still learning how to do basic programming.
I am not professional leetcoder, but good enough if I need to in addition to my experience that has been good enough so far.
That being said if you think it’s right for you, go for it.
After you've been in the industry for a while, you are likely to be referred for jobs by former colleagues, or even invited by those former colleagues to come and interview at their new companies. If you excel at your job, your former colleagues will be more likely to do this. They very likely have no idea how good you are at Leetcode-style problems.
Former colleagues in most cases can just get you out of the application lottery - that’s it.
This is less true in PMish roles where there really isn’t a technical leetcode style interview or at the exec level where the friend is the hiring manager or ultimate decider.
In most cases though? Leetcode still gets you the job.
I thought about it a couple of times, and then synergies came into play.
Now you can take that flight to see your family members regularly. You can now have a house large enough where if you have guests over they no longer have to sleep on the floor. You no longer are held hostage with the fear that you will be bankrupted by your aging parent's health issues. You can afford to bury your loved ones. You no longer have to make compromises with your children's lives that you wish you didn't have to make. Your basic needs will always be met. You are de facto exempt from physical labor since you can afford to pay others to maintain your life like a prince.
Sure, money in itself doesn't buy happiness. But it buys you a lot of opportunities to be very very happy, and serves as personal insurance towards things that might put the average person into a tent on the sidewalk.
Who I am impressing with my canned milk buy?
Ads that show a lifestyle that tricks you into believing you can become something you are not is a small segment perhaps larger on social media. I don't see any of that or if I did it doesn't register. But I do see can of milk for sale.
I go through fliers and get coupons. I get email ads on products I purchased for discounts.
Even those store displays with toilet paper are a form of advertising. I don't mind them and often buy a pack if on sale.
Unfortunately for the majors in advertisement these days, that's their bread and butter.
I recently retired after working 29 years in software development. I was always very well paid but a notch below the FAANG-level. I always focused relentlessly on achieving financial independence by saving and investing as much as I could using Boglehead techniques. I can now do whatever I want.