|
brand engager posted:What're the current places everyone uses for job listings, I've got to start looking https://www.workatastartup.com if you want to roll the dice.
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 09:38 |
|
|
Love Stole the Day posted:I'd imagine that that's more because of hiring freezes than because of layoffs Definitely, but now we have a hiring freeze too because of the low attrition so… hope everyone likes their current job.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2023 13:10
|
|
|
Recruiters are being squeezed hard across the industry. Hiring freezes and a wealth of available talent means companies are cutting spend on headhunters left and right. It's a bloodbath for recruiters who rode the 2020 maang engineer-hoarding train and have less than 3 years experience in the field. The recruiters who are still employed are growing more desperate to prove their worth over in-house HR. Find these people on LinkedIn and be nice to them, and they'll hook you up with all sorts of interviews and opportunities. They want to land you somewhere quickly and you have a ton of leverage to push back on lovely roles you're not interested in.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2023 14:19
|
|
|
Judge Schnoopy posted:Recruiters are being squeezed hard across the industry. Hiring freezes and a wealth of available talent means companies are cutting spend on headhunters left and right. It's a bloodbath for recruiters who rode the 2020 maang engineer-hoarding train and have less than 3 years experience in the field. It depends. When I was job hunting last year, one recruiter (org) was rather unhelpful. Lots of unmet promises. Another one helped me out well and got me a much better job and much better salary I was expecting.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 04:15
|
|
|
It's worth noting that the job market has drastically changed since December 2022. That's when the layoffs collided with a weak tech economy and turned the candidate market upside down. There are currently way more candidates than jobs.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2023 11:47
|
|
|
I'm getting pretty goddamn frustrated with the ongoing winnowing of work environment mixed with RTO. My company is doing a return to office (3 days/week) and like...I'm not really against working in the office; I generally like chatting with people and my coworkers/etc are nice enough and I do think some things are better in person. However: When I started working in tech it was still somewhat common for Tech ICs to have individual offices, although certainly cube farms or open seating were becoming more common. There's a whole host of words about why open seating for ICs is dumb, so I'll just move past that to the latest bullshit, which was when my org said 'oh we're not going to have assigned desks, it'll all be agile!.' MotherFUCKER if you're going to have me drive into the office, dealing with traffic and parking bullshit, the absolute loving minimum requirement is that you give me a consistent desk to work at. Like sure, a few agile / hotel seats in a building is good! It's nice to have somewhere to drop in and work when you're visiting another team or for folks who are highly mobile, but my whole floor is mostly developers of one flavor or another; we don't float around that much. And if you're doing 3 days a week in office, there's always one day that everyone is going to be there, so you can't really get away with agile! One day a week minimum you'll be at full capacity! Luckily my management chain raised a fuss and it looks like we shot it down, but this constant squeezing of 'oh well we gotta save money!' is just exhausting. The part that's the most irritating about this is that the company is the one that's really wasting effort here. If I show up to work and have to spend an hour fighting to find a desk, I'm not going to stay an hour late, I'm just going to get less done. Same with all sorts of other little bullshit like tinier desks, lovely IT-assigned hardware, etc; all of this just makes me less effective at doing my job, which I enjoy doing, and would like to do without having to jump through a bunch of bullshit hoops.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 06:18
|
|
|
My belief in the invisible hand of the market is shaken by companies not welcoming saving money for offices. I wonder if it will change a bit when long term leases expire and they don't have to justify them any more. Or is all of this because people want to see the peons?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 11:47
|
|
|
Sistergodiva posted:My belief in the invisible hand of the market is shaken by companies not welcoming saving money for offices. There's an uproar of Elons out there convinced that remote workers don't actually work, and instead consume pay for nothing in return. They believe paying more for offices and local workers results in higher productivity. Of course it's simply the dead and incredibly lovely culture at the places they run.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 12:21
|
|
|
There's also a huge amount of well-payed managers who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. With no people in the office it becomes that much more obvious that most of them hardly do anything.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 13:13
|
|
|
Many large companies have a huge list of investment portfolios sitting in real estate, heavily in office spaces, as for decades it's been a safe investment. All over my town I'm seeing office space being converted to apartments. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 13:43 on May 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 13:38
|
|
|
My company is all in on being hybrid. We signed a lease on new space, and my division has 110 FTEs, with 18 permeant seats in the new building. (Plus a whole lot of Hotel space throughout the entire building.) The intent is that the space is not used for day to day IC work, but only for when there's the need for face to face collaboration. I may just be an old but not sure how it's going to work but I look forward to at least trying it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
I think at this point if they try to make me come back to in-person work, I'll go, "Sure thing, boss!" and then ignore them while polishing the ol' resume.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
It'd be pretty hard for me to commute to my company's office seeing as it's in Texas and I'm not, but the other edge of that sword is that our new project manager is being a control freak about having webcams on (to the point where he went to HR on me and my supervisor's behalf about getting one expensed) The good thing is nobody actually gives a poo poo and when I talk to my supervisor about it, it sounds like the PM is pissing everyone off by worrying about non-project management specific things. So hopefully it's a problem that will solve itself
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 17:50
|
|
|
Macichne Leainig posted:our new project manager is being a control freak about having webcams on Speaking of which, what’s the deal with webcam hate? If the hardware is provided by the company, and it’s only on during meetings where you would have been physically sitting across from someone anyways, what’s the problem? I’m guilty of wearing a ripped weekend t-shirt until my first meeting, at which point I’ll get into some halfway presentable polo shirt. If you don’t have an office-like room at home (or you do but it’s a huge mess), the background can be blurred. I understand and agree with a lot of RTO groaning, but using webcams for meetings sounds fine?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
Webcams for small meetings isn't too bad, but in large meetings (more than like 8-10 people) no thank you. If I'm not really participating I don't want to be perceived thank you very much. This can be solved by not having large meetings.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
If I don't have a webcam I don't have to pretend to pay full attention to the hour long meeting and can do stuff on my home computer when it's boring
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
I’ve perfected my facial mannerisms of intense focus while absolutely doing the opposite. I also keep cheater clothing nearby to throw on over my pajamas for any time I need to throw the webcam on. No big deal overall to me IMO
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
epswing posted:Speaking of which, what’s the deal with webcam hate? If the hardware is provided by the company, and it’s only on during meetings where you would have been physically sitting across from someone anyways, what’s the problem? There's a percent of population that observing themselves leads to large amounts of stress. You can turn it off your self camera in Teams at least, but until we found that I did get a lot of feedback from some individuals about how intensely uncomfortable being on camera made them.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:If I don't have a webcam I don't have to pretend to pay full attention to the hour long meeting and can do stuff on my home computer when it's boring You’re literally being paid to be there, maybe pay attention even if it’s boring? Or say “hey guys I’m going to duck out to get something finished in time, unless you need me for anything else?”
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
epswing posted:You’re literally being paid to be there, maybe pay attention even if it’s boring? I'm being paid to produce work, not to be there. I can test this hypothesis by showing up but not producing any work for a couple of weeks.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:23
|
|
|
epswing posted:You’re literally being paid to be there, maybe pay attention even if it’s boring? Nah, I'm here to work less and live more and get paid as much as possible in the process
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
Over half the meetings I get invited to don't require my active participation I don't see what having my camera on adds in those instances, like yeah it's not a big ask to have it on, but if they want to watch me digging for gold while two middle managers hijack the meeting so be it I guess
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
epswing posted:Speaking of which, what’s the deal with webcam hate? If the hardware is provided by the company, and it’s only on during meetings where you would have been physically sitting across from someone anyways, what’s the problem? I'm with you. Remote work comes with the trade-off of weaker bonds between teammates. There are a lot of ways to mitigate this, one of which is building virtual rooms where people can see each other and talk "face to face". I've accepted that frequent use of webcams is a price of remote work, and I find it worthwhile every day. It sure as hell beats risks of over-bonding that you frequently see in offices, resulting in cliques and deep interpersonal conflicts.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
prom candy posted:I'm being paid to produce work, not to be there. I can test this hypothesis by showing up but not producing any work for a couple of weeks. Thanks for proving that you are in fact paid for your time, not to produce work. epswing fucked around with this message at 19:06 on May 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
If I am paid for my time then why am I not paid more when I spend more time on work?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
turning my camera on occasionally is a small price to pay for never having to fly or go into an office again
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:If I am paid for my time then why am I not paid more when I spend more time on work? Doesn't that just prove you're paid for your time? I guess I'm lucky that I've never really been on a team where I'm invited to totally useless meetings. Either it's good for me to hear what's up, or I'm an active participant in discussion. Even during my time at Microsoft that was never really the case. Also in my experience there's a lot of people who say 'my job as a dev is just to write code' which is...not really true, any more than people who think devs should be totally asocial weirdos are right. Development is translating a need (business or personal or whatever) into computer code, and that is basically half talking to people and working with others. Like tbh, I think my current team could use one or two more meetings to actually discuss stuff and work through it instead of working in isolation and failing to learn from each other, although realtime discussions aren't the only ways to do that. Falcon2001 fucked around with this message at 19:31 on May 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:If I am paid for my time then why am I not paid more when I spend more time on work? I don't understand what you don't understand. Unless you're in sales and your comp to a large degree is based on commission, or you're in some mechanical turk nightmare where you are paid per widget, you're being paid for your time. You might get nothing done during that time, or a little, or a lot. You might be great at your job, or not. Either way, you are trading your time for money. When you ask "why am I not paid more when I spend more time on work" do you mean outside of business hours, or during business hours? If the former, I advise that at 5pm you stop doing work (and if the company has a problem with that then perhaps it's time to renegotiate your comp). If the latter, I guess it depends on your definition of "work". Assuming you're a programmer, some programmers only want to write new features, and turn their nose up at fixing bugs, or testing, or writing documentation, or attending meetings, or taking support calls/emails. Maybe writing documentation or attending meetings feels like a waste of your valuable time because you're some solid gold marvel of a programmer, but what do you care? Let the faceless corporation pay you software development prices to sit in meetings. Edit: I suppose if I were at the beginning of my career, as a fresh-faced junior I'd be actively looking to level-up my skills and my role in the company, and I would probably look at long and perhaps useless meetings being a barrier to those goals. If that's you, fair enough. epswing fucked around with this message at 19:54 on May 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 19:37
|
|
|
epswing posted:Maybe writing documentation or attending meetings feels like a waste of your valuable time because you're some solid gold marvel of a programmer, but what do you care? Let the faceless corporation pay you software development prices to sit in meetings. Yeah the other thing is that if your manager does the 'you just need to get it done' when you tell him 'I don't have enough time to do X because you're wasting Y hours of my time each week in useless meetings', that's mismanagement and you should probably bounce or find another manager. Like sure, you can have a discussion about timelines and whatever, but fundamentally if your company wants to pay you to waste time in dumb meetings that's kind of their prerogative, and they're making a decision to do that at the cost of other productivity, and that's on them to manage that balance and you to give feedback on it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Falcon2001 posted:Yeah the other thing is that if your manager does the 'you just need to get it done' when you tell him 'I don't have enough time to do X because you're wasting Y hours of my time each week in useless meetings', that's mismanagement and you should probably bounce or find another manager. You're right, I forgot to mention the deadline aspect. 100% agree.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
epswing posted:If the latter, I guess it depends on your definition of "work". Assuming you're a programmer, some programmers only want to write new features, and turn their nose up at fixing bugs, or testing, or writing documentation, or attending meetings, or taking support calls/emails. I feel like you're deliberately ignoring that some meetings are valuable and others are very not. I have lots of great meetings in my role. They're usually ad hoc and involve only a few people. I also have a handful of recurring meetings with large attendee lists and they are frequently a waste of time for almost everyone there. Some organizations have an absolutely shitload of the latter type and they're an active impediment to getting work done. For example in my wife's completely dysfunctional company it's common for people to book PTO and then do work because it's the only way they can get focused work done, and if they don't get their focused work done they don't get raises or promotions.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
My company is so completely WFH that we could never go back, everyone is just too far apart. The customer support team was really spread out before 2020, so everyone was kinda used to it already. We encourage people who are close to each other to meet up though, and will pay for them to go grab dinner together or something. Leadership will also occasionally fly out and visit people, just so as many people as possible have at least met in person. Since late 2022 though, I've started to notice some candidates who act very strangely during our (not all that hard) remote technical interviews. Like staring off to the side for a while then spitting out a fully formed but not quite right solution to the problem they're working through. A couple of other people I know who do interviews at other companies have been seeing this recently as well and the consensus is that they're using ChatGPT. Back when we interviewed in-person this wasn't possible, but now it's a whole new skill we're needing to learn. We tell candidates not to use any AI assistants already, but it's really just the honor system and our own ability to suss it out. Unfortunately, it's probably just a matter of time until one of these people slips though. I've implemented a blanket No AI, No Exceptions policy on the dev team so anyone leaning too hard on that isn't gonna have a good time here, but it is a down-side of fully remote work as we really can't stop people from using it if they really wanted to. A friend who manages an outsourced team at another company has found GPT like boilerplate in the code they're getting, stuff like "Sure, here's a function which does..." in comments. As if the average quality of code being produced across the industry wasn't low enough already, now we get a bunch of crazy AI nonsense mixed in as well. I wonder if somebody has come up with a scammy ChatGPT driven AI-generated-source-code detector yet. steckles fucked around with this message at 20:58 on May 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
Camera-on has benefits that I often find myself wanting, but I never insist on it. If the meeting isn't bullshit, there's no need to play truant officer; and if it is bullshit, forcing people to show evidence that they look like they're paying attention won't improve it. Suppose you're a boss. If one of your employees isn't doing their job, it'll show in other, more direct ways; if you're relying on being able to see them in order to detect goldbricking, then you have the bigger problem of trying to manage an organization without having any adequate means of knowing what is happening inside it. If you suspect an employee is cheating you and needs surveillance to deter it, then you have to ask yourself: why did you hire people you don't trust?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 20:46
|
|
|
We have a weekly departmental meeting where the list of "meeting norms" at the top of the agenda says "camera on!", but my boss immediately starts a screen-share so nobody can see anybody else anyway. I'll just pretend not to know what the word "camera" means if anybody ever calls me out on it. Meanwhile, in our stand-ups with only four people, everybody leaves their cameras off. That was good for me this morning, because I was still in my towel.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
We do cameras off unless someone new joins, then we do intros and I try to meet with the new people with my camera on until they can put names and faces together.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 21:09
|
|
|
steckles posted:I've implemented a blanket No AI, No Exceptions policy on the dev team so anyone leaning too hard on that isn't gonna have a good time here Honestly I would have a hard time going back to no Copilot at this point. I don't use it much for writing logic or anything like that but it's pretty handy as just kind of an intelligent autocomplete. I get why companies don't allow it but it saves me a lot of typing.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
One of the only benefits to remote meetings is that the folks who are absolutely crucial for 5 minutes of a 1 hour meeting can do anything else with their lives for 55 minutes. In general tho, remote meetings where multiple folks may need to actively discuss at one time are trash compared to face to face. Bongo Bill posted:Suppose you're a boss. If one of your employees isn't doing their job, it'll show in other, more direct ways; if you're relying on being able to see them in order to detect goldbricking, then you have the bigger problem of trying to manage an organization without having any adequate means of knowing what is happening inside it. If you suspect an employee is cheating you and needs surveillance to deter it, then you have to ask yourself: why did you hire people you don't trust?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 22:57
|
|
|
prom candy posted:Honestly I would have a hard time going back to no Copilot at this point. I don't use it much for writing logic or anything like that but it's pretty handy as just kind of an intelligent autocomplete. I get why companies don't allow it but it saves me a lot of typing.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
steckles posted:Yeah Copilot is probably pretty harmless for a lot of use cases. We make software for industries that are heavily regulated and needs to abide by a lot of different standards as far as data handling goes, and I'm not convinced that AI generated code is safe enough for those use cases yet. We periodically reevaluate so maybe that will change. A broader issue is that it's hard to know if AIs are regurgitating GPL code, or code that's similar enough. If you end up in due diligence with any reasonably sophisticated investor, that stuff is gonna be found and "I dunno, Copilot/ChatGPT/whatever did that", isn't a good answer. This seems insane to me. ChatGPT is amazing for so many things beyond "write my entire function". I've been starting new projects with asking chatgpt a bunch of domain questions about what I'm building so I can quickly collect ideas. I might ask for a few code snippets as examples, and then write my work myself. It's a huge productivity accelerator. Complaining that copilot code isn't safe enough for your liking has me extremely curious about your testing environment. Shouldn't unit tests / integration tests / end-to-end (or staging) smoke tests prove your code base is safe, regardless of what's in it?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 09:38 |
|
|
Does anyone actually have a test suite that they'd call 'complete'? I've never worked on a project where our testing was that complete, and my current project has the most complete set of tests I've ever seen, and it's hardly exhaustive. To that end, I could see some fear about ChatGPT or CoPilot writing 'bad' code for a complex project. I use it a lot for syntax-like questions (and it's awesome for that), but I would not copy/paste whole methods or even substantial chunks into the code base without careful review.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2023 23:31
|
|
