gautambay

Thanks for the perspective. Any predictions on how long before junior roles open up again / what are you seeing at your employer?

I wonder about this too.

In that case, feels like the current trend is unsustainable and should reverse once the intermediates eventually revolt? WDYT?

Have both your companies explicitly stated that the freeze on entry-level hiring is because of copilot?

The point about stitching together resonates.

Thanks! Appreciate the data points and insight.

Do you have a perspective on whether this will exacerbate the shortage of senior engineers in a few years, if way fewer new people enter the profession in that time period? Or will it be okay since the need for humans will reduce commensurately?

Agree with this. In fact, it's already changing in a couple of domains. (1) Teams that build data products often have product managers. (2) Data analytics consulting teams have project managers who interface between the clients and the analysts.

I realize this isn't a proper answer to your question, but it reminds of a tweet from Monica Rogati:

  "A decade in academia taught me a bunch of sophisticated algorithms; a decade in industry taught me when not to use them."

Source: https://twitter.com/mrogati/status/726115691703619584

Thanks for this!

I've been on multiple H1B visas, at both large companies and startups. I've also sponsored H1B visas as an employer. I would support this bill.

The headline is a classic example of sensational journalism by the Times of India.

The $130k salary requirement applies only to "dependent employers", defined as employers with over 15% of their workforce on H1Bs. This is clearly aimed at reducing H1B misuse by TCS, Infosys, and their ilk.

The vast majority of companies who employ people on H1Bs aren't "dependent" employers by this definition, and hence will be unaffected by the salary increase rule. If anything, they'll benefit from more visas being available to non-dependent employers.

Also, startups will likely benefit from the 20% requirement.

Does it remain a top-10 degree if thousands of people take the course every year? Genuine question. I work in education, and we struggle with this selectivity vs. access question ourselves.

Didn't work for me.

This report is pretty comprehensive, but I think it's US-only. https://www.upwork.com/i/freelancinginamerica2015/

> It amazes me that I can become relatively proficient on any subject I want, for free, from a $50 smartphone nearly anywhere in the world.

As the internet increases parity in education globally, immigration reform will become even more important for the US to retain its edge, as people born outside the US will comprise a larger percentage of the world's best entrepreneurs.

As an immigrant trying to fix education, #1 (fix education) and #3 (education reform) ring especially true for me, but it's also fascinating to think how closely-tied the two are.

Thanks, super helpful!

Which parts of HCI do you think are the most important to include in a curriculum like this?

Thanks for the feedback. The author did include an HCI course in the extra recommended resources, right at the end. The challenge (I think) was that the HCI course on Coursera, at ~100 hrs of work, would be as long as the rest of the curriculum.

Are there topics within HCI that you think are more fundamental than others?

Unfortunately, yes. And sadly, that is the case for a few other materials later in the path as well.

This is v1 though, and we'll work to make the experience better.

The goal of this Learning Path is to list helpful resources into a curriculum that a motivated beginner can follow to learn the essentials of UX Design.

Designers of Hacker News, we'd love your help on 2 things:

1. We'd love your feedback on the curriculum itself. e.g. Do the topics and flow look right? Are the projects sufficient?

2. If you're a UX designer who loves to teach and mentor new professionals, I'd love to talk. We're planning a learning experiment that combines the power of the internet with one-on-one human contact.

Two thoughts:

1. People will move back to cities as cities become more attractive (thanks in part to things like the shared economy). There's already some evidence of this trend among millennials. Reverse white-flight if you will.

2. Uber will eventually work just as well in suburban areas. The fundamental economics don't change (higher resource utilization => lower costs). It will take longer to get to penetration levels that result in sufficiently high utilization. But we'll eventually get there.

Interesting to note that

(1) The cost of attending college has grown faster than inflation over the past few decades.

(2) Yet, it seems that the ROI on college is high (for those you graduate), as evidenced in this article.

(3) There's another statistic that gets bandied in education reform circles: 43% of college grads in 2013 were underemployed (working jobs that don't need a college degree).

I wonder how #3 reconciles with #1 and #2. Perhaps this is a case of averages lying, and the ROI data for top colleges might look very different from bottom colleges (to the point where there may even be no income disparity between attending a bad college vs. not attending college).

Has anyone seen a better / deeper analysis of this?

Me too. perhaps they didn't prepare for the traffic spurt from HN?

Valid points on the complexity and the ensuing corruption.

I suspect that as real-time data-gathering becomes cheaper and more prevalent, the costs of policing will become trivial. That's certainly some years away though.

Fair points, all.

However, markets fail when there is a misalignment of incentives and/or lack of information/education. I view the government's job primarily as aligning people's incentives with the desired long-term direction.

In India (where I'm from), there have been decades of dole-outs for the poor (especially farmers), but it has failed to create any long-term economic benefits for those communities. On the other hand, education (both for the farmers and their children) has been far more effective in uplifting people out of poverty.

I realize that the average American is more educated and has better access to information that the average Indian farmer. But still, you can be assured that some of that "basic income" will be going into a slot machine.

Perhaps the solution is a basic income with some restrictions / incentives around how to spend it?

Very interesting (and certainly plausible)! Could you link to any of the experiments?

i prefer universal essential services (healthcare, education, etc.) over a guaranteed basic income.

with basic income, you run the risk that the receivers spend it on shiny objects (especially in an economy like ours with rampant consumerism) instead of things that benefit them and their families long-term.

of course, what constitutes "essential services" can be the subject of a lengthy debate.

I've found it super helpful to surround myself by other entrepreneurs (they "get it" more easily). With the best ones, we can both speak with our guards down, and be open about our vulnerabilities.

I don't have data on this, but I actually believe you increase your odds of success by being open about your insecurities. Among other things, it helps you form connections that are more human.

If anyone in SF would like to talk through stuff, my email is in my profile. I've seen my share of lows, and been helped by other entrepreneurs. Would like to pass it forward.

Can you share links to any good ones?

Thanks for answering!

Super interesting! Very curious about a few things:

-- How did the large company recruiters find you, and what do you think made them contact you (e.g. If through LinkedIn, what credentials / keywords did you showcase there)?

-- How much of the attention do you attribute to Hack Reactor (which is selective, and hence has some of the signaling benefits of a name brand university) vs. your own online study?

-- Did you pursue any of these conversations? If so, how did they go?

I realize I'm asking a lot of questions, and am happy to take this offline if you prefer. I just love learning more about alternate education.

I don't know much about the situation in Europe, but between Oct-Dec'13, I informally surveyed ~30 Silicon Valley tech employers (recruiters and hiring managers) and asked them exactly this question ("Will you hire someone who doesn't have a CS degree but has taken the equivalent MOOCs?"). The research was for my startup, which is in the space.

Here's a rough summary of the findings:

-- Overall, in spite of there being a shortage of developers, there's a general reluctance to hire people without a CS degree.

-- In general, hiring managers were more open than HR / recruiters to the idea of "self-taught" candidates.

-- Startups much more open to hiring entry level folks without a CS degree than large companies who generally have more choice (and bureaucracy).

-- Among those who were open to hiring self-taught candidates, 100% said they would like to see a strong portfolio of projects that the candidate has built.

-- Greater willingness to hire for non software developer roles. e.g. I heard multiple stories of people without CS degrees getting a foot in the door as QA / testers, and then rising through the ranks into engineering (e.g. at Zynga).

I believe the GaTech-Udacity degree costs ~$7k, BTW.

That's good feedback. We have a resources section at the end. Can definitely add some books there.