Peroni

The measure should always be the quality of a solution a candidate produces in response to a problem, not how they got to the solution. If you want to dive into the 'how' then what you're actually measuring is communication, something AI is still pretty bad at.

The point of going to the gym isn't to make it easier to lift heavy things at work, it's for self-improvement.

>The writing assignments I give my students are gym tasks, not work tasks... I assign them because the very act of writing, which includes thinking and outlining and drafting and editing, making and criticizing and revising arguments, will help develop the critical thinking skills they will need in their future careers.

I'm sorry but why are we assuming that any of those things are 'critical' skills? I think there's already a strong argument that the need for those skills in the workplace are declining.

Location - Assuming you're not based somewhere obscure, there'll be endless compensation reports, benchmarks, glassdoor data, etc available as a starting point.

Growth stage - How you compensate people when there are three people in the company is immensely different to when there are 20 people, 120 people, 500 people, etc. Equity is more important at the earlier stages but with everything going on in the world, don't assume equity alone will be sufficient to win people over.

Product industry - Some of this is location specific but different product industries pay different premiums. In the UK for example, FinTech pays more than most areas of tech, gaming pays less than most.

Funding - If you're sitting on a ridiculous amount of funding, then you need to lean into paying as far above average as possible. One thing that doesn't and probably never will change is that the more you pay people, the easier it is to hire. Obviously the less funding you have, the less you have to spend on comp but see my point above in growth stage.

It's difficult to put much value in your personal projects without some form of social or commercial validation. Essentially, personal projects that aren't being used by anyone but you hold little to no value in terms of resume content.

How so? It displays useful info at a glance. Where's the bad UX?

20%-30% on average.

>Assume you'll struggle to heat your home because the UK has the highest energy costs in the world.

This really isn't the lived reality for most people in the UK.

>Assume you won't be have access to healthcare unless on your deathbed and you won't be able to afford private because the above.

No idea where this assumption is coming from. Free universal healthcare is the default and access is easy, even through the NHS.

>If you're happy with this lifestyle then you might be able to find a QA engineer job in the UK for £30,000

Utter nonsense. I won't deny, decent QA jobs are becoming more difficult to find but the average salary is at least double that.

Agreed. In my experience that's almost always a bad idea if that L8 hasn't previously had first-hand experience of working at a very early stage company and understands the enormous difference between the two environments.

Not sure where this assumption is coming from. Most recruiters are looking for consistent work experience with reputable companies. Sure portfolios help but it's not even remotely on the same spectrum.

>I dont know how people are coming up with such juicy and vanity metrics but mostly are noise.

It's really not noise at all. If you actually use these ATS platforms from the hiring side, you'll see first hand how they've all doubled down on AI filtering. Candidates are directly experiencing increased difficulty in getting past the initial screening stages.

1. As sloaken said, your documentation of processes and procedures is NOT adequate. This applies to everything. From your code commit process to how to book vacation days. Document everything early. Notion is your friend.

2. Like it or not, your work culture is going to change. New people obviously means new personalities but it also means new ways of working, some good, some bad. It really is worth spending some time with the first 15 people that helped get your company to where it is today and define some operating principles (otherwise known as 'company values'). This blog post (not mine) is an incredible insight into why this stuff actually matters at your stage of growth: https://lowercaseopinions.com/post/useful-values

3. Hiring gets expensive and laborious. You're reaching a point where it just isn't practical for you to be involved in every hiring decision. That being said, don't let go of it until you are confident that everyone involved in hiring for your company is aligned on what 'good' looks like both in terms of candidates and hiring process.

4. More people means more individual questions, problems, and ultimately admin. More people getting paid means more payroll issues and questions and adjustments. More people interacting with each other means more disagreements, arguments, and issues. Someone needs to be able to handle all of these issues. Usually the challenges are distributed across different teams but again, without some rigour around how you want your company to approach these issues means that different managers/teams will take different approaches which in turn will amplify the problems rather than solve them.

5. Reconsider the financial impact of hiring experienced people. Bringing in strong leaders early can enormously mitigate the operational costs of scaling. Hiring a highly experienced person at your stage will have a big impact on your budget but long-term, that investment will pay dividends both in terms of the quality of work but also in sharing the burden of handling these scaling challenges.

Even if all AI progress grinds to a permanent halt today, there's already enough utility in its current capability to force these questions. As a result, how we train and educate graduates and young people needs to change.

I have no doubt you need to have actual experience to be able to ensure AI output is at a production standard but if we accept that reality, then a shift in how we educate and train young people could make an enormous difference in ensuring employers still see value in hiring people with no real commercial work experience.

I'm not sure an American company prioritising the privacy of American people is worth questioning. As a European, Anthropic are very low on the list of companies I worry about in terms of the progressive eradication of my privacy.

Go give it a go and as a minimum, you'll learn something about why it doesn't already exist yet and in the best case scenario, you'll create something that lots of people find useful!

One small bit of feedback is that it would be useful to see an 'other' category as the four roles defined seem a bit limiting.

Also, the data notes that 83% of the companies surveyed were small enterprises (with 10-49 employees or self-employed persons). It's no surprise that these companies find it more difficult as they tend to be more budget-conscious, meaning they struggle to compete with bigger company salary levels.

That's not what the law states. The actual law states ...by prohibiting the provision to children in the United Kingdom of VPN services which can facilitate evasion of OSA age-gating processes so a corporate network protected by a VPN doesn't fall foul of the regulation.

>Given that children can generally work from 13

Not in the UK they can't. Children can work part-time at 14 however they can only start full-time work once they’ve turned 16.