Hacker News Reader

Comment by paxys | Hacker News Reader

If they weren't able to hire these "better developers" in the first place what is going to change now?

Maybe those "better developers" were suddenly laid off by even bigger corps? I've noticed a trickle down effect in our very-small hiring queue. I can't help but imagine mid-sized companies are getting access to devs that only wanted to work for FAANG before.

By your logic the people laid off from other companies would also be the kind that weren't worth keeping. If everyone is firing bad developers and looking for good developers, where do all these good developers magically come from?

easy: you add "We only hire rock stars" to your job postings.

I would not take it as a given that the individuals laid off were the worst performers at the company. It could be that they were highly compensated and deemed too expensive, or happened to work in the wrong department/business unit.

Except by the original train of thought "everyone is laying off bad developers" so if you accept this (IMO flawed) premise you're going to be in a worse position after you get through this gigantic process.

unless you have identified a company whose bad developers are better than your bad developers. And if you have developed a process to identify that I think it's time to pivot.

It's a little sickening to take your train of thought to its destination, which is that all of the developers being laid off right now are "bad developers" and will put other companies in a "worse position" if hired.

Should someone laid off as a developer simply accept they can't cut it, leave the industry, and find a job as a barista where at least they can earn some tips?

You make a lot of assumptions about what devs are being laid off in the first place. And about the absolute quality of a developer.

One company's garbage developer is another company's 10x.

Look at the math. It works even if you're worse at hiring "better developers"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com