Stack stats
joelonsoftware.com
joelonsoftware.com
Higher reputation --> more time on the web to answer questions --> likely unemployed --> more desire to upload CV.
More likely that they're UNDERemployed, bored at a dead-end, stupid job, so they have time to answer questions.
That said, the typical high achiever on Stack Overflow is also a high achiever at work. I know for a fact that Jon Skeet's employer loves him despite the fact that he has the highest reputation on the site.
That said, there are a lot of working arrangements in the world, and "spends almost all time working on assigned tasks" is just one of them. I get quite a bit of Internet karma (numerical and otherwise) while physically present at the day job, in downtime between tasks. My employers and I have an understanding on this: they treat me like an adult and let me manage my own use of time, I keep earning all the gold stars they stick onto my productivity evaluations.
("Has time to X" is not a measurement of productivity. It is a poor proxy for productivity, which is probably being used because management is not competent at actually measuring productivity. If you actually measure productivity, and the numbers say that Engineer X is 40% more productive than the company average, and you think "That's funny, he seems to have time to update his blog and check Facebook in between reading on new Javascript techniques and, oh yeah, there might have been some coding involved", then you know what that tells you? That Engineer X is 40% more productive than the company average.)
I cannot tell much about my current job's details (I'm bound by an NDA), but mostly it involves not coding as such but rather answering the other people's programming-related questions, in other words exactly what I'm doing on Stack Overflow.
I also have a blog where people ask me the questions and I answer them.
SO and the blog just help me to be in form for the job: almost any problem the people contact me with at work I have been asked about (and answered) a dozen times on SO and the blog.
Might be worth proving it wrong.
Invested heavily (time) in SO -> more likely to continue to invest in new SO features
Pragmatically, 99.99% of startups don't become Twitter and will manage fine with one DB server and one web server, especially if you use a compiled language and a commercial-grade database and nice hardware. And even if you become Twitter, well, they had terrible scaling problems, and it doesn't seem to have hurt them one bit.
So, they still would be.
I sometimes feel like there's two types of people interested in the NoSQL stuff:
1. People building internet scale sites (Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc)
2. People who don't know how to optimize their database.
But maybe I'm just cynical. :)
Having a small barrier to listing a CV ensures that most CVs in the system represent people who are genuinely interested in finding a job and actually have the confidence that they are moderately qualified.
If you've ever been on the employer side, and looked at the resumes you get when you put an open job listing on a high traffic site like monster.com, you get enormous piles of junk, people that are completely unqualified. Our theory is that having 5 qualified candidates is better than having, say, 10 qualified candidates in a pile of 300, both for the employer AND for the employee who would rather be in the smaller pile.
In any case, $29 is a tiny amount. You'll spend a lot more than that on the haircut you get the day before your interview.
of course I haven't looked for a new job since the economy tanked, for all I know dice may not work any more :)
If you are competing against more people, say, if you're looking for a Java job in the Bay Area, it may work against you, but I doubt if it will make the site useless. In my own recruiting using Stack Overflow careers I found plenty of good people who didn't even use Stack Overflow and I still contacted them because their CVs were great.
If I had to take a guess though, it would be that as you guys get more and more successful there's a fear that you will succeed in creating the number one method in the world for getting a programming job and it will end up discriminating against people who don't answer questions on StackOverflow or fit your model of a programmer.
That somehow you guys end up being the gatekeepers for defining what a good programmer is and how they get hired.
I was wondering what your thoughts are on this?
There are 1492 CVs on StackOverflow right now, and maybe 9,000,000 programmers in the world. Even if we're monumentally successful we're still going to be only a tiny fraction of the hiring of programmers that goes on in the world... a TINY fraction.
I should also add that in the bizarre scenario that StackOverflow actually became a common way of getting programming jobs, it would be a metric ton better than the current system of Monster and Dice and emailing around Word resumes which are scanned in by stupid software that looks at keywords.
I'm just trying to understand where the criticism is coming from because I don't get it.
There was an uptick in my respect level for your operation when I read that.