> Cheating ultimately cheats oneself, but it's very galling that it's now becoming accepted as okay behavior in American society
Man, you crushed it here, so true.
Man, you crushed it here, so true.
I've gotten negative performance review feedback from management that was word for word from the 'things I think I can improve'. I've gotten passed over for jobs and promotions because I don't do a good enough job of 'selling' my experience.
Basically, the most successful software engineers I've met also have the ability to bullshit with the best used car salesmen, and it's hard to argue my unwillingness to do so hasn't held me back.
Is this a lack of confidence?
> I've gotten passed over for jobs and promotions because I don't do a good enough job of 'selling' my experience.
Selling your experience IS an important skill. Other factors may have played a part too.
> successful software engineers I've met also have the ability to bullshit
Is it their bullshit that gets them to be successful? Or is it that they're more friendly, tactful, and and positive?
To be clear, I don't doubt that you're telling it as you see it. I'm just wondering if your perceptions match the reality.
If someone is always talking about how bad they are at something, then I'll interpret that as the person being negative, lacking confidence, and pessimistic. That's not the kind of person I'd want to be around in general, let alone hire.
I was always raised that you don't brag about yourself, you don't take credit for things you didn't really do, and you don't over promise and under deliver.
As I've gained experience, I've learned that people can take self deprecating things as gospel and as a worker it's your job to talk up your abilities and invitations to identify 'things you can improve' have to be spun in a positive way. As much as I hate to admit it, salesmanship, presentation, and ones ability to 'smooth talk' seems to get you further than raw technical ability. I don't hold it against devs that are able to do that, it's just been an adjustment for me.
There are those who constantly put in overtime to put out fires that they created. To management, these seem like hard-working, dedicated folks. Meanwhile those who design things well, don't have fires to put out, and leave on-time every day seem lazy. All too often the first group is given praise instead of the second group.
This is a point of unfairness that is rampant in the industry. I don't know of any way to solve it, besides each person being their own promoter, hype man, sales man.
Enjoy the circle of yes men.
If you disagree, tell me which of the two groups you are in?
Everyone seems to have come out of the pandemic convinced that they need to tighten whatever screws they have to get theirs. And that triggers other people to do the same thing. Cheating enters the realm of possibility because people (correctly and incorrectly) believe others are doing the same thing.
It's gross and feeds on itself. I'm not sure what will help it get better.
I'm not sure why anyone would expect "the average Joe" to maintain some semblance of integrity when very few successful individuals do the same. The overall message is pretty clear - if you want to succeed, you will need to cheat.
Many humans seem to be incredibly short sighted
I want to believe this, but I'm not sure it's always true. Timing of opportunities matters a lot. Someone who is not as skilled in programming probably cheated their way into a FAANG job during the height of the pandemic and made absolute bank, perhaps being able to sock away $200k-$300k since then. That money could then be invested and start compounding, leading to a materially different outcome from someone else who played it by the rules and was better.
The long-term for the cheater might be to simply find a less demanding job and continue riding the prestige hike they got when they snuck into the FAANG job.
When did this wonderful meritocracy exist? Where?
I think back to Jobs and Woz, and how he got him to hack a project to win a contest, and then didn't tell Woz and kept the money. It's been here since day 1.
Less adult time per child means a generation with far less formation.
It has to collapse before it gets better, but it will take centuries to get back to Rome levels of violence and back stabbing.
Also child sexual and physical abuse has reduced during this same time frame. "According to David Finkelhor who tracked Child Maltreatment Report (NCANDS) data from 1990 to 2010, sexual abuse had declined 62% from 1992 to 2009 and the long-term trend for physical abuse was also down by 56% since 1992." from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abuse
We have a lot of problems, but your understand of the issues are poor.
Abuse isn't always reported, and abusers often manipulate or lie.
No fault divorce makes it vastly easier to divorce for a lot of reasons and making it unnecessarily hard to leave can foster situations where it becomes abusive because they don't get along that well and can't just up and leave because they want to.
Twice as many children are raised by single mothers today compared to 50 years ago. Maybe that’s the more relevant statistic? (Yes there are hero stories where one could argue this doesn’t matter…)