Comment by edw519 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by edw519 | Hacker News Reader

  1979
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your COBOL?"
     edw519: "10."
  Recruiter: "Great! I have tons of work for you."

  1983
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your data base?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in COBOL."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about COBOL. I need data base people."

  1987
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your Microsoft?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in data base."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about data base. I need Microsoft people."

  1992
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your Oracle?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in Microsoft."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about Microsoft. I need Oracle people."

  1996
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your HTML & CSS?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in Oracle."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about Oracle. I need web people."

  2001
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your Javascript & PHP?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in HTML & CSS."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about HTML & CSS. I need back-end people."

  2009
  Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your Ruby & Python?"
     edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in Javascript & PHP."
  Recruiter: "No one cares about Javascript & PHP. I need Ruby & Python people."

Number of days without work since 1979: 0.

Lighten up, guys. If you can build stuff, learn, and work well with others, you'll probably always be fine.

edw519: "4. But I'm a 10 in Javascript & PHP."

Hang in there, 2009 edw519! JavaScript is increasingly back again in 2012 ;-)

especially on the back-end

I like this, but I don't understand it. How you can end up with Number of days without work since 1979: 0

Isn't the reality more like the fact that you have to constantly obtain new skills, thus making you only "hireable" part of the time?

In 2001 you learn you don't have what folks are looking for so you go and "retrain", get a couple years solid experience[%] in that skill, and then have a decent run until 2009 when the whole thing rinses & repeats?

To me, senarios like these, make the case for actually having a CS degree -- that way you have a chance of obtaining a "zero" in number of days without work since 1979.

1979 Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your COBOL?" CS Graduate: "10." Recruiter: "Great! I have tons of work for you."

1983 Recruiter: "On a scale of 1 to 10, how's your data base?" CS Graduate: "4. But during my days at MIT, we did cover database theory quite intensely; I'm sure I could adapt to your needs very quickly" Recruiter: "Oh, MIT 'eh, I'm sure you could, when can you start?"

... and so on...

[%] I know a solid programmer can pick up new skills pretty quickly, but recruiters have a funny way of always insisting on a certain number of years of experience in a particular skill, don't they...

P.S. I don't have a CS a degree.

I think the point is: don't go through recruiters to find work. Even if the company says "we only accept applications through recruiters" that can be short-circuited if you have an acquaintance who already works there.

and if you don't?

Go to (and preferably speak at) the same user groups and conferences that people from that company go to. Hack on the open source projects that the company uses internally. You will soon have friends in that company, and probably 10 others.

This is assuming that they are using open source projects internally and that you A. Know what they are using and B. That they care about who maintains them rather than treating them as a black box that does stuff for free (how most open source projects are used most of the time in practice).

Also tech conferences seem to be a pretty expensive way (at least in terms of travel) for hoping to bump into someone.

At some point, if the company is not making efforts to reach out to better programmers (by actually looking up the name behind the open source project and showing a strongly present figure in tech conferences) then it's their loss, no?

If a company only trust "recruiters" to select (or pre-screen) candidates for them, then this says a lot about their way of managing and interacting with "our" kind of programmers (by that I mean people who read HN, are enthused by cool innovative projects, write blogs, publish open source code, ...)

If the company doesn't help you bypass the recruiter, maybe you should bypass them altogether?

"This is assuming that they are using open source projects internally and that you A. Know what they are using and B. That they care about who maintains them rather than treating them as a black box that does stuff for free"

Then turn it around and look for companies based on the open source products that they use. There are plenty of companies that are heavy users of open source software, and don't hide that fact. You might have to move or something, but that's life.

"Also tech conferences seem to be a pretty expensive way"

There are many cheap conferences, or free exhibit hall passes for early-bird registration (usually allows BoF sessions, as well, and maybe parties); and user groups are ordinarily free (maybe you chip in for dinner or something). There are conferences or user groups in many areas about something, and maybe you can just drive. Often, you can share a room with another attendee (ask on some mailing list related to the conference) to save on lodging. If you have developed something or have some kind of speaking experience, the conference may pay for some or all of the travel expenses, and may waive conference pass. There are even some open source projects that have money waiting for anyone who wants to bootstrap a user group in their town.

And these things are not theory. I have done absolutely everything I have suggested to you here (except trying to bootstrap a local user group): get free conference exhibit pass, drive to conference, share room, get started contributing, get major patches accepted, and get jobs through community connections. And I still do it, and I see many people rising up through very similar means that had little in the way of marketable talents a while ago.

Disclaimer: Nothing about this happens overnight. It takes a long time. There are no magical steps where I can say "do these things and you will get this". You have to look out for the opportunities on your own. Start attacking your own reasons why something can't be done, knocking them down one by one.

Thanks for the advice.

I do in theory like the idea of speaking a tech conference. I am just worried about the level of experience that would be required to do so.

I don't want to stand up in front of X number of people and tell them stuff they already know.

I live in a place that is very very far from being a "tech center" in the way that SV is but there are a few user groups around (mainly PHP groups, LUGs etc). I should probably check them out.

I did go to a local LUG once but that was about 5 years ago and mostly consisted of unemployed neck beards grumbling into their pints of bitter. Hopefully things have changed since.

"I don't want to stand up in front of X number of people and tell them stuff they already know."

A topic that is always safe is "I used technologies X, Y, and Z to build this thing, and here's what I learned along the way". It's usually a little more entertaining because it's a story (often with a few funny anecdotes); and you're admitting that you didn't do everything perfectly from the start, so being wrong somewhere during the presentation isn't a deficit. Being wrong really only matters in a persuasive talk.

(Aside: it's pretty well established that teaching is one of the most effective ways to learn deeply.)

I'm sure you can find better speaking advice elsewhere, but one other thing I should mention: especially at user groups, a talk is just to start a conversation, which will often be held at a bar later. So don't worry about concluding anything in a profound way.

As for location, then yes, living within driving distance of the SF bay area helped me a lot. But I didn't begin speaking until I moved to Portland, Oregon, where I regularly attended a user group. I'd like to think that a lot of other areas have something to offer as well, but I'm sure it takes more searching.

Depends on the company. Larger organizations will often have a mandate that EVERY hire go through proscribed HR processes and channels. MAYBE if you know a C level person you can get an exception.

Last time I got hired by a big organization (definitely not C-level), my interaction with HR was as follows: they called me up to say they were sending an offer letter, and asked if by the way I could fill out an application and send them a résumé, for their records.

That's probably an extreme case. Often, knowing someone who will vouch for you will get you straight to the stage of interviewing with a technical person. You still have to go through the motions for their process, but it's a pure formality.

HR process, yes, but there's a huge difference: most (not all but definitely 90+%) of recruiters are simply searching Google for buzzwords and forwarding you over to HR (for this, they expect large amounts of money - typically 6 months of your first year salary). HR usually filters again and ships it through to the actual group which is hiring.

Having a friend on the inside avoids two potential filter failures without having to actually change the HR process - it's saving HR the cost and hassle of a recruiter and essentially assuring them that they're not going to get flack for wasting anyone's time if they forward your resume through to the actual hiring manager.

If you can go from 4 to 10 in something new every few years, that's amazing in itself. (although maybe we're using different 1-10 scale here; mine is probably log and I'm probably and 8.x at my strongest skill, and 4-6 for secondary skills after some solid effort.

That's why I hate the 0-10 scale for skill level.

Some folks consider a 10 to be the guy who invented the language/technology. Linus, DHH, etc. Almost no one is a 10 on that scale.

Others consider a 10 to be "I'm an expert in any of the tasks you're going to be asking me to perform with this tech". That's the scale that's more important to me.

Then, of course, you get the brand new grad who says they're an 8 in a language despite never making anything that's not a basic class project in it...

From my limited experience the right answer is always 7. It's a BS question so yes there is a right answer.

Here's why: When I see resumes, the only people who put 10s are recent college graduates. They put a 10 for Java and then don't know what a hashCode is. This demonstrates more about the question than about the candidate

I've also interviewed at a few places, been asked the 0-10 question on a set of languages and been told that 5 "wasn't what they were looking for" and they wanted "10s only." This demonstrates more about the company than about the question.

The right answer is 7. It says "I'm good, but not Linus Torvalds" and if anyone asks a follow just say "I'm never really sure what to say there." It doesn't matter if your answer means anything because the question doesn't

I recall a blog post where someone remarked that "7 is really a 3". Precisely because of Dunning-Kruger: people who don't know how big the field is just say 7 because it seems reasonably high and yet doesn't imply mastery.

That'd imply that game-theoretically, the right answer is 8. ;-) Enough to tell the interviewer that you've gotten past 7, yet not so high to make them think that you think you know everything.

(Personally, I've taken to saying "Judge for yourself" and listing my accomplishments. That's what they're really interested in, they're going to do it anyway, and this way I show enough confidence in my own abilities that I'm willing to let others judge them.)

"When I see resumes, the only people who put 10s are recent college graduates. They put a 10 for Java and then don't know what a hashCode is."

Please tell me what colleges these graduates are coming from so I know never to hire/work with any of them, ever.

I don't think that's a specific problem with the colleges themselves.

It's just when you spend 3/4 years in that kind of bubble and you get getting good marks on all your assignments you are naturally going to think "I've mastered Java" based on evaluating the only evidence presented to you.

Of course there is a difference between knowledge and aptitude here.

Would a candidate who doesn't know what .hashCode() does but who after a 10 minute explanation says "yes, I understand now makes sense" be a bad hire?

I program a lot of Java but I am unfamiliar with huge amounts of both the language and standard API (especially the parts dealing with 'enterprise' stuff and concurrency). This is mainly because I explicitly design my Java apps around a shared nothing/POJO-JPA configuration and I don't use RMI , Reflection or JMS.

Does that mean I am a bad Java programmer?

I he only legitimate use for that question is to have an easy excuse to no-hire an idiot who says "10".

The correct answer is "I dunno, what does 5 mean" to show humility and an insistence in meaning in metrics, and if pushed say 6, and trust that decision makers at anywhere you care to work ignore the dufus who insisted on a number.

What most people seem to do with these scales is pick the language that they are most comfortable with and say that they are an 8 or 9 in that and then arrange everything else on the scale relative to that.

The problem with this is that your overall numbers are likely to go down over time.

If you are a college freshman who spent a weekend learning JS then you can now probably do most of everything you can do in your main language (say Java). That means that you put down "5" for JS.

Once you've got a few years under your belt, your knowledge in any new language has a much higher standard to meet.

I filled in a questionnaire for a job once that has vague questions such as "Rate your skills in TCP/IP , Novice/Intermediate/Advanced".

I had no idea what the scale was here, did advanced mean being able to write a TCP/IP stack from scratch, identify bottlenecks in huge networks or what?

I was trying to decide whether to tick novice or intermediate however it turned out that "advanced" actually meant being able to run traceroute from command prompt and set A records in DNS.

I remember the advice a friend of mine gave me, he said "Just put 10 for everything, you'll get an interview"

I just put that I had worked with TCP/IP on a resume once, and they asked me what fields were in a TCP header. I was able to reconstruct all but one from first principles, since I didn't actually remember them all.

If I'd put "10" in TCP/IP for that company, I would have been slammed in the interview. As it was I passed. Apparently no one ever remembers the CRC byte in the TCP header. :)

People who have to worry about checksum offloading for high performance know this :) ... This is a feature of high end network cards.

(although, in fairness, I'd only require that level of knowledge at the tip of tongue if someone was going to be a network stack developer or high level sysadmin/network admin -- for a regular web developer, just knowing that there are tcp headers and flags which can be set, and which might get mangled by devices between client and server, is enough.

It's CRC at the level below TCP (well, 2 layers below: ethernet)

A phonology professor of mine at Ohio State spent 20 minutes during one of my classes discussing the syntax and semantics of grade point averages, which i have to say, was one of the most useful things anyone had ever explicitly taught me while at Ohio State.

In particular discussing how, despite using the same syntactic formalism, the semantics of what was considered "passing" for undergraduate students vs for graduate students was something no one had ever enunciated to me explicitly (e.g. you pass as an undergrad if you're getting Cs. If you're getting Bs as a graduate student, you are doing it wrong).

And it's not because grad students are supposed to do better, it's because grad school grades are more inflated.

It's because grad school grades are meaningless. No one ever asks about your grad school GPA. So "A" means "pass" and "B" means "fail".

In the job interviews I held, I clearly stated on the pre-hire self eval, "0 is I've never used it, 10 is I wrote a book on it"

And I'd STILL get people who rated themselves 10 in multiple categories.

  >> If you can go from 4 to 10 in something new every few years, that's amazing ...

If you follow edw519's posts (and I recommend that you do#), you will see he is an amazing guy whose life revolves around programming.

#see http://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=edw519, free ebook, "The Best of edw519": http://edweissman.com/53640595

Also well worth following:

http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=pg

http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=patio11, http://www.kalzumeus.com

http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=tptacek

http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=cperciva

and many others...

Recruiter: "No one cares about COBOL. I need data base people."

Need a better recruiter. People are still making really good money with COBOL :-)

True story:

Recruiter: "So you were writing Java code that talked to an Oracle Database, right?"

Me: "Right"

Her: "What version of Oracle was it?"

Me: "8i I think"

Her: "Sorry, we're looking for people with 9i experience." (9i had just come out.)

Me: "Really? You know SQL[1] is a standard and I'm writing Java code anyway, we were using a ORM as well. I didn't even end up writing that much direct SQL code."

Her: "Sorry, the client specifically said Oracle 9i -- I'm looking at it right now. They're not looking for Sequal experience."

This is when I decided to always avoid recruiters if I possibly could.

[1] I pronounced this "Ess Que Ell" but she responded "Sequel" which I think was the name of another database vendor at the time.

Both pronunciations (SQL/sequel) refer to the same thing, and both are correct.

http://patorjk.com/blog/2012/01/26/pronouncing-sql-s-q-l-or-...

I think his point was that the recruiter did not know this.

I just call it "sqwel" or "squeel" that way nobody is happy.

Interestingly, microsoft SQL server is pronounced sequel server: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3594718/how-do-you-pronou...

I pronounce MySQL as My-ess-cue-el.

I see some value in this type of thing. If someone can't bluff their way past a (non)technical recruiter, will they be able to handle a requirements meeting or communicate status to a PM? Some engineers really can only talk to other engineers.

What's the worst thing that could happen if you fibbed "Oh yeah 9i, I've used that too."? You'd get an interview with the database guy who actually knows the difference.

> What's the worst thing that could happen if you fibbed

Well, the worst thing would be if it was a trap question designed to weed out the people who lie at initial recruitment selection.

"Well, look, I was under an NDA, using 9i as a beta tester..."

Skin that cat!

"Sorry, but we can't stomach the risk of being seen as forcing you to divulge information that was acquired under an NDA. It just isn't worthwhile for us to risk the lawsuits."

>What's the worst thing that could happen if you fibbed "Oh yeah 9i, I've used that too."? Well, the managerial term is to manage expectation. But it's just effort that seems unnecessary* *-- perhaps it's just my current situation..

IME, a lot of the best programmers are anal (often to a fault), and won't lie in that situation.

Not because of ethics or morals but just because they refuse to say something they know is technically incorrect.

Life just doesn't work that way. IME the people who fib a bit and embellish when applying for jobs because they know they can, they do a lot better than those who tell the truth all the time.

Reality is most employers put up fake 'requirements' because they don't know how else to find 'smart, can learn, gets stuff done'.

Are you advocating lying in job interviews?

I think he's advocating 'advancing your skill-set'.

Oh And: Self-Marketing, it isn't always evil.

But I'm being honest, sometimes you have to make yourself sound good to get the goods.

I think this is a valid to an extent, like accepting a title of "expert" in a technology used by the company that you know well but are not actually a real "expert" in. You and I know that the real experts are the guys constantly replying to stuff on the mailing lists and making lots of significant patches to the core of the project, but sometimes it's OK to condescend to use the vocabulary of the plebes and just embrace "expert" within that context. You aren't deceiving anyone here because it's just a different definition of a word, and you are using the definition that the other people expect. In fact one could say it's deceptive to insist on your specific concept of an expert when you know that the people interviewing just need someone qualified.

But I think claiming experience with an explicit version that was stated is going a little bit too far. It's important to clarify. Maybe someone actually does need help with the new platform, and after all, if they're having inept recruiters do their pre-hire screening, you're probably not missing much anyway.

There is a bit of line to fudge there but it definitely doesn't extend into falsifying tasks or skillsets imo.

Definitely. And I suppose I should have clarified; the 'advancing your skill-set' bit was a joke. Or at-least meant to have humour behind it. Sadly the internets doesn't pass off the jovial nature of my voice. :D

Like Sheldon Cooper in Big Bang Theory when the judge asked him to apologize, "I'm a scientist, I never apologize about the truth!"

I have been hired largely on keyword matches before, it was a bad move.

Think about it: most everyone you're going to be working with will have been selected on such a basis as well. Not so much bad people, but on the whole a thoroughly uninspiring workplace where creativity was actively discouraged.

Unless I was really desperate, I would prefer not to get hired at a place that used that sort of process.

> What's the worst thing that could happen if you fibbed "Oh yeah 9i, I've used that too."

Getting a job with a company where clueless people make important decisions. Not everybody handles such situations well.

The worst thing that could happen? I might get the job and find that all of my coworkers were the kind of people who lie whenever they think it will advance their own interests. That is, I'd be working with people like you. That would be a terrible outcome.

Reminds me very much of the job adverts I used to see asking for '5 years C#' when .Net was about 6 months out of Beta.

Either they only want people who worked for MS on the platform/language itself or the whole thing was copy/pasted by a recruiter.

I liked the theory that someday a recruiter would ask DHH how many years of Rails experience he has, and he should answer "all of them".

Wasn't there some actual recruiter offering DDH a senior rails developer position? I'm pretty sure I read about that in DHH's twitter stream some time ago.

Groupon didn't quite ask for his level but did ping him about web dev work.

https://gist.github.com/1285068#gistcomment-56327

Here's another true one:

"Do you have experience with APIs?"

"Uh...Yeah. Yeah, I do."

"How about electrons?"

(Just wait. It'll happen.)

In my place, when people say "SQL" they usually mean "MS SQL Server". Perhaps that's what in her mind.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com