|
feedmegin posted:What kind of company advertises for a job without even the slightest indication of how much they're willing to pay, though? (And if they are doing the 'competitive pay' thing and not saying, that's not going to help getting qualified candidates, just saying) Most of them, in my experience? I don't job hunt often, but I do get quite a bit of recruiter spam, and the majority of it does not mention specific numbers on pay. I think you'll find the same if you browse job postings. There are of course a few hiring/recruiting platforms now that do make companies up front about compensation, but I view them as the exception, not the rule. The last time I did look for a job, I don't remember *any* of the companies discussing specifics on compensation until I was given an offer.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:What kind of company advertises for a job without even the slightest indication of how much they're willing to pay, though? (And if they are doing the 'competitive pay' thing and not saying, that's not going to help getting qualified candidates, just saying) Where are you seeing indicators of pay levels anywhere on job advertisements? None of the big companies have salary numbers: https://www.facebook.com/careers/jobs/a0I1200000JIa6OEAT/ https://www.google.com/about/careers/jobs#!t=jo&jid=/google/software-engineer-1600-amphitheatre-parkway-mountain-view-6540009& https://www.uber.com/careers/list/21237/ https://www.amazon.jobs/en/jobs/433626
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:The stereotype is that only the homeless and old ladies use them because that's what overwhelmingly happens in car-dependant cities. Also it's a part of the city where almost everyone has a car because walking is a huge pain in the butt. Also it's like 95 degrees out. I'll bring up my car if I drat well want to 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:Also it's a part of the city where almost everyone has a car because walking is a huge pain in the butt. Also it's like 95 degrees out. Waaaaaah This is another example of how you're pretty insufferable and why you've been drummed out of the Boston thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:Waaaaaah huh, boston people really are like that
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Has anyone gotten into a dev job due to professional experience with scripting? I've scripted a couple time-consuming brain-numbing tasks over the past couple months, and will keep doing so when the opportunity arises. The thing I don't know is if companies are interested in someone programming scripts rather than a project for end users. I also haven't really gotten into OO Powershell, it's all been procedural. Or does calling other scripts from within scripts count as OO? It just felt natural to me, but I'm not sure if it's because I've been doing OO work in school and personal projects for so long. Am I looking at DevOps if I want to do that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
Steve French posted:Most of them, in my experience? I don't job hunt often, but I do get quite a bit of recruiter spam, and the majority of it does not mention specific numbers on pay. I think you'll find the same if you browse job postings. There are of course a few hiring/recruiting platforms now that do make companies up front about compensation, but I view them as the exception, not the rule. It's common enough, but people with options don't necessarily want to waste their time. Blinkz0rz posted:Waaaaaah What are you talking about?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
22 Eargesplitten posted:Am I looking at DevOps if I want to do that? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Gounads posted:You have a dedicated scrum master but no sprint in 2 months? What does he do? He's only been here for 2 weeks. Job update: got my 2nd choice job  starting next month, I hope it's as cool as it looked.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 10:46
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:Yes. Ehhh, that's kind of simplistic. DevOps has been, I think unjustly conflated with ops + scripting when the reality is that it's more akin to pipeline development + behavior change. While a lot of my job responsibilities lie in keeping the lights on, so to speak, the larger part of it involves advocating for shared infrastructure responsibility and working with bizdev to achieve that. Also developing internal tooling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:Ehhh, that's kind of simplistic. DevOps has been, I think unjustly conflated with ops + scripting when the reality is that it's more akin to pipeline development + behavior change. While a lot of my job responsibilities lie in keeping the lights on, so to speak, the larger part of it involves advocating for shared infrastructure responsibility and working with bizdev to achieve that. Also developing internal tooling. It was simplistic but it's still the correct answer. DevOps is a very complex field but it is at its base about improving efficiency through automating tasks and processes which is what dude seems to be enjoying. I didn't conflate it with anything. Your assumption that he has no desire to grow beyond what hes currently doing is a little weird. Ed: also I work in security which has been justly conflated with writing terrible, unmanageable, inefficient scripts and over the last week my team has had its OKRs saved by DevOps so I promise I'm not throwing stones from my glass house. pr0zac fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Aug 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:It was simplistic but it's still the correct answer. DevOps is a very complex field but it is at its base about improving efficiency through automating tasks and processes which is what dude seems to be enjoying. I didn't conflate it with anything. Your assumption that he has no desire to grow beyond what hes currently doing is a little weird. it started as a philosophy of recognizing operations as an aspect of development. source control, tests, reproducability, etc all grew out of that. the current 'we need a devops team' view of devops is a pretty serious corruption of what devops was supposed to address (but it's better than the old 'operations is a bunch of bash scripts and maybe some perl, if we're lucky' world)
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:it started as a philosophy of recognizing operations as an aspect of development. source control, tests, reproducability, etc all grew out of that. the current 'we need a devops team' view of devops is a pretty serious corruption of what devops was supposed to address (but it's better than the old 'operations is a bunch of bash scripts and maybe some perl, if we're lucky' world) this++ Like all good things in tech it got buzzworded to hell and what remains is the shambling hulk of what devops tries to do without the spirit of what it should be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
You guys are getting really defensive considering nothing I'm saying disagrees with you? Why does suggesting that dude's interests align with DevOps seem so threatening?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:You guys are getting really defensive considering nothing I'm saying disagrees with you? Why does suggesting that dude's interests align with DevOps seem so threatening? Because they think you're saying yes to scripting when you really said yes to infrastructure management.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 16:45
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:You guys are getting really defensive considering nothing I'm saying disagrees with you? Why does suggesting that dude's interests align with DevOps seem so threatening? treating devops like some discrete role and not just another developer role is ghettoizing devops and is going to lead right back to the situation where ops is seen as a cost center, a necessary evil and subordinate to dev where the whole point of devops was recognizing that it shouldn't be. if you want to focus on infrastructure design & management as a developer that's great, but no one should aspire to be a 'devops' developer
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:treating devops like some discrete role and not just another developer role is ghettoizing devops and is going to lead right back to the situation where ops is seen as a cost center, a necessary evil and subordinate to dev where the whole point of devops was recognizing that it shouldn't be. if you want to focus on infrastructure design & management as a developer that's great, but no one should aspire to be a 'devops' developer I think he meant as an area of interest, not a job title, but assuming even that is awful... Why not? Plenty of people aspire to be a "security" developer or an "infrastructure" developer, so why not devops? I know dozens of people across several teams at my company whose job is to solely help teams better manage operations through shared infrastructure. They are certainly not in a ghetto.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:treating devops like some discrete role and not just another developer role is ghettoizing devops and is going to lead right back to the situation where ops is seen as a cost center, a necessary evil and subordinate to dev where the whole point of devops was recognizing that it shouldn't be. if you want to focus on infrastructure design & management as a developer that's great, but no one should aspire to be a 'devops' developer This is as stupid as saying calling mobile development a discrete role ghettoizes mobile devs or saying its wrong to state web developers and embedded developers have different roles. Its a separate focus inside the sphere of developer jobs with its own collection of skills and knowledge and its completely reasonable to use devops as a shorthand term to clarify all of that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:This is as stupid as saying calling mobile development a discrete role ghettoizes mobile devs or saying its wrong to state web developers and embedded developers have different roles. i think that if a company is using devops or sre as a team/role title it exposes that they value that role below 'real dev'. this is true in my experience from google all the way down to tiny startups. other than that i think we're in agreement
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
pr0zac posted:This is as stupid as saying calling mobile development a discrete role ghettoizes mobile devs or saying its wrong to state web developers and embedded developers have different roles. As long as we don't forget that you had the sheer gall to encourage somebody towards an interest in development without pedantically correcting their particular phrasing of one discipline within it. You monster.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
FamDav posted:Why not? Plenty of people aspire to be a "security" developer or an "infrastructure" developer, so why not devops? I know dozens of people across several teams at my company whose job is to solely help teams better manage operations through shared infrastructure. They are certainly not in a ghetto. Deployment infrastructure is hard, and one's efforts typically have very little visibility to customers, so you're at a disadvantage out of the gate right there. Developers want to do things their way and just write code, so you get a big pile of application and config to setup, and even if you are working directly with the developers from the start, unless you are given authority over the deployment infrastructure, you can sometimes just be overruled and you end up spending your day writing a patchwork of scripts to make a monstrosity work. Much like scrum, it's extremely rare to see devops done "right".
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Deployment infrastructure is hard, and one's efforts typically have very little visibility to customers, so you're at a disadvantage out of the gate right there. Developers want to do things their way and just write code, so you get a big pile of application and config to setup, and even if you are working directly with the developers from the start, unless you are given authority over the deployment infrastructure, you can sometimes just be overruled and you end up spending your day writing a patchwork of scripts to make a monstrosity work. I really don't know what I'm talking about but...that sounds exactly like "security" and "infrastructure" to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:I really don't know what I'm talking about but...that sounds exactly like "security" and "infrastructure" to me. Software infrastructure... it depends. If you are doing PaaS work, software infrastructure is highly visible and client facing. Software infrastructure engineers are often key standard-setters that carry the core of company software and have a lot of internal prestige and visibility. Security... also depends. Some clients want in-depth understanding of your security system and may have pen-testers come in, or you may simply participate directly in sales meetings to talk technically with clients. I've never seen a client ask to see a CI/CD pipeline or deployment process though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Deployment infrastructure is hard, and one's efforts typically have very little visibility to customers, so you're at a disadvantage out of the gate right there. Developers want to do things their way and just write code, so you get a big pile of application and config to setup, and even if you are working directly with the developers from the start, unless you are given authority over the deployment infrastructure, you can sometimes just be overruled and you end up spending your day writing a patchwork of scripts to make a monstrosity work. Your customer is the developer, not the person who shops in your marketplace. They want to write code, but they also don't want outages, or high ops churn. They do want flexibility, speed, and integration into other existing systems so that it's easy to do the right thing. I've worked on deployment architecture in a couple of roles now, and if I ever thought that my work wasn't prioritized I'd jump ship immediately because that company is hosed long term. If your company wants to scale, you need to invest in great infrastructure that works, or find out too late that you're paralyzed. It's also something that is generally "boring as poo poo" at smaller companies while being super compelling at large companies, so I could understand why it's less interesting at small companies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
So I just got an offer for a position that wouldn't start until the end of next month. It's also contingent on the approval of a contract so it's not 100% certain yet. I'm pretty confident that my current company would match the offer. I don't have any intention of staying, but I'd like the leverage to negotiate for more. The problem is that I obviously can't take the offer to my current employer just yet. Can I accept an offer and attempt to renegotiate a few weeks from now if my employer counters?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:So I just got an offer for a position that wouldn't start until the end of next month. It's also contingent on the approval of a contract so it's not 100% certain yet. I'm pretty confident that my current company would match the offer. I don't have any intention of staying, but I'd like the leverage to negotiate for more. The problem is that I obviously can't take the offer to my current employer just yet. You don't have an offer if it's contingent on some outlying factor
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Fellatio del Toro posted:So I just got an offer for a position that wouldn't start until the end of next month. It's also contingent on the approval of a contract so it's not 100% certain yet. I'm pretty confident that my current company would match the offer. I don't have any intention of staying, but I'd like the leverage to negotiate for more. The problem is that I obviously can't take the offer to my current employer just yet. If you accept an offer, you have agreed that their compensation is sufficient. Nothing stops you from saying, a few months or weeks later, that you feel underpaid. There's just no real obligation on anyone's part to meet those needs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
I got an email yesterday from someone asking if I'd be interested in learning more about a position at Disney. Cut to me sitting in front of my computer this morning wondering why no one had joined the conference call they'd scheduled 10 minutes after it was supposed to start. What's this? An email from the person's administrative assistant? "I apologize for the inconvenience. It turns out that the opportunity requires a CS degree and we can't proceed with your candidacy. My apologies." You motherfuckers contacted me first, don't lead people on like that  According to some friends I dodged a bullet, though. Apparently Disney is a dumpster fire after replacing a bunch of devs with H1B candidates?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
IAmKale posted:According to some friends I dodged a bullet, though. Apparently Disney is a dumpster fire after replacing a bunch of devs with H1B candidates?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
IAmKale posted:According to some friends I dodged a bullet, though. Apparently Disney is a dumpster fire after replacing a bunch of devs with H1B candidates? Disney has over 180,000 employees. It's pretty much impossible to make any general statement about the company as a whole. I know some people who work dev at Themeparks (In Seattle no less) and are really really happy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Pretty sure they did that for their games dev side of things but yeah everybody I've met that was doing stuff other than dev says Disney is alright to work for. They're a lumbering behemoth of a company though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/26/us/lawsuit-claims-disney-colluded-to-replace-us-workers-with-immigrants.html Disney isn't all magical kingdom, but again it all depends on the team.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:treating devops like some discrete role and not just another developer role is ghettoizing devops and is going to lead right back to the situation where ops is seen as a cost center, a necessary evil and subordinate to dev where the whole point of devops was recognizing that it shouldn't be. if you want to focus on infrastructure design & management as a developer that's great, but no one should aspire to be a 'devops' developer DevOps is too close to IT, it's a cost center and not a value creating position. Hughlander posted:Disney has over 180,000 employees. It's pretty much impossible to make any general statement about the company as a whole. I know some people who work dev at Themeparks (In Seattle no less) and are really really happy. Without a doubt, Disney is a third tier company to do development work at. I know people doing dev work for 50k a year and they are happy, it doesn't mean the company is actually good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
What kind of trip am I in for if I go down the temp-for-hire path? I'm pretty risk-averse so my initial reaction is to reject it for a guaranteed full-time job, but I've been told that it's not all that bad - apparently it's a great way to get experience in a number of environment? I would be nervous walking into a six-month assignment only to have to worry about finding another one to move into right away afterwards. What should I look out for if I go down this path?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
You're almost certainly looking at no PTO, or really any benefits other than health insurance. Being on contract means that if things go bad financially, you're the one that's going to be gone by the end of your contract because people find it more palatable to not hire someone than to fire someone. If you get a direct hire job offer, go for it unless you can use that as leverage to get something better from the contract to hire. What better means is up to you. If I had options, I would go direct hire over a similar or slightly better contract to hire, but around here it's the only game in town.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
Props to Hudson River Trading, nice to see someone putting in some effort now and again, from snack overflow jobs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Kephael posted:DevOps is too close to IT, it's a cost center and not a value creating position. What a fundamentally broken way of thinking. I'd argue that the software that keeps the product running is absolutely not a cost center but is, instead, equally as valuable as the product itself. Without it, who cares what the product is supposed to do?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
Blinkz0rz posted:What a fundamentally broken way of thinking. I'd argue that the software that keeps the product running is absolutely not a cost center but is, instead, equally as valuable as the product itself. Without it, who cares what the product is supposed to do? I mean yeah you as a tech person realizes this and it's the correct way of thinking about it. The bean counters aren't techies though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I mean yeah you as a tech person realizes this and it's the correct way of thinking about it. The bean counters aren't techies though. Accountants are also (but not always) not * research scientists * machinists * physicists And yet there are companies where they are valued and where they are not. You likely want to work at a company where tech is valued and appreciated at all levels.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 03:31 |
|
|
I feel like devops and IT are seen as high-level janitors. They just make things nice for the people who really work there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2016 04:22
|
|
