Skip to content

Using Clouds for too long might have made you incompetent

Technology
82 31 1
  • Isn't the solution to train people to get past HR? I know it would infuriate me to have to do this but HR needs to be treated as an obstacle. Remember when personality tests first started appearing. There were people teaching how to give the answers HR wanted.

    That's what's happening, and it's diminishing the quality of candidates - dramatically. Getting past HR isn't a valuable skill except for getting hired.

  • I have the opposite experience, when I was doing interviews I just skipped the very obviously underskilled people (which, IIRC were in the single digits) and interviewed pretty much everyone.

    For context, I'm the main architect and dev of the company I was hiring for. Most of the candidates were horrible.

    In 2006 I had a hard time finding C++ programmers in a university town. 9/10 who responded to the ads were just clueless. Of the remainder, we had a simple test - here's sample code in an IDE that draws a straight line on the screen (you'll be doing graphics programming in the role) - take that code and turn it into a program that draws a sine-wave in the same space... Everyone put computer graphic on their resume's, expressed confidence in their ability to perform in the role, deep former experience, but 5/6 who passed the clueless test couldn't manage that, given unlimited time and resources - the computer has internet access and a browser window open right there beside the IDE- USE IT!!!

    Sadly, today we'd probably have to shut off the internet access aspect, or make the test much more difficult. Even AI can draw a sine wave.

  • A lot of this has to do with recruiters. I've been interviewing for a few years at my company such with as many different sets of recruiters, from recruiting firms to our corporate recruiters, to ones we hired ourselves. Our corporate recruiters handed over garbage candidates who we could often tell wouldn't work out after the first 10 min of the interview, whereas the other two groups of recruiters would do a good job filtering so we'd get than a 50% hit rate on our first round. Unfortunately, we promoted our recruiters once the need for talent dropped (or they moved on to a recruiter firm), and now they're unwilling to go back to recruiting.

    The quality of your recruiter matters quite a bit, so you'll want to find someone who is experienced hiring a certain type of person so they know what to look for.

    The quality of your recruiter matters quite a bit

    Absolutely, but in a big company you don't get to choose which recruiters you use - corporate just sends you candidates.

  • The main factor, IMO, is that everyone wants good engineers but good engineers don't change jobs that often.

    Meaning most of the candidates you interview will suck in one way or another.

    And everyone calls themselves "senior" nowadays.

    I think 4 years experience gets the "Senior" title in our company now. I can understand having 3 years experience and being frustrated when you can see how much better you are at your job than your "more senior" middle managers, but... there are plenty of things that you continue to learn in your first 10-20 years of experience, and having diversity of experience brings even more value that's rarely acknowledged in any ranking scales - actually the ranking scales usually reward stay-put loyalty over diverse in depth experience, and that's just backwards in my experience. Although, I have also known plenty of "job hoppers" who got around from place to place every year or two and it was clear after working with them that was because they didn't really contribute adequate value anywhere they went.

  • I'm reminded of when my boss asked me whether our entry test was too hard after getting several submissions that wouldn't even run.

    Sometimes prospective employees are just shit.

    Our entry test should have been dead simple for anyone applying to the position. Position: C++ computer graphics programmer, 1-2 years experience implementing technical graphics displays in C++ language. All resumes submitted, of course, claimed this and more. All interviewees, of course, professed great confidence in their abilities. 9/10 candidates, when presented with "the test" failed spectacularly. The ones who passed, generally, did it in less than 10 minutes - with a couple of interesting quirks which revealed their attention to and/or willingness to follow directions. The failures ranged from rage-quit and stomping out without a word, to hours of pleading for more time to work on it - which, in principle, we granted freely, but after 30 minutes if they didn't have it they never got it.

  • I get what you’re saying, but also see the other side - these services exist and aren’t ever going away, so the level of knowledge you need about these to use them at least competently is significantly reduced.

    What their existence does mean is that there are thousands of developers who wouldn’t ever touch or learn any of this stuff previously are now actually learning it and using it. That’s a positive thing. Not everyone needs to be an expert on the inner workings of everything that a service provides unless you’re specifically looking for an expert.

    Also…..people lie on CVs and cover letters. If your ad has buzzwords and technology X, Y, and Z, then you should expect people with little to no knowledge of at least one of those things to have all 3 on their resume.

    I applied to a place that asked "experience in SquirrelScript" - that seemed like a personality test, I told the truth: 0. Surprisingly, when I got hired there, they were indeed one of the three places in the world using SquirrelScript at the time. Manager said that over half of applicants professed deep experience with SquirrelScript, but none ever had it for real. It wasn't hard to learn.

  • I disagree. On paper that sounds good, but I firmly believe good engineers are curious, so they'll learn a lot more than necessary to do the job.

    For example, when I worked at a company that designed antennas as a software engineer (built something tangentially related), I didn't need to know anything about electrical engineering, but I was curious so I asked a ton of questions and now I know a fair amount about EE. These days I work in a very different domain and still ask a ton of questions to our domain experts. In my own field, I look into all kinds of random things tangentially related to the tools I use. In each case, that curiosity has come in handy at some point or another.

    In each role, I can tell who's there to clock in and clock out vs who is genuinely curious and looking to improve, and it's the latter group who tend to produce the best work and go on to great roles after leaving our company, while the 9-5 warriors who just focus on the requirements tend to do pretty mediocre when it comes to advancement.

    When I hire, I look for that curiosity because you never know what you'll need to know to fix a prod issue quickly. My esoteric knowledge about SSH helped keep my team productive for a few days when IT was being slow revolving our issue, and likewise we've had quick resolution to prod bugs because someone on the team knew something random that ended up being relevant. That's what I mean when I say I look for a diverse team, I want people with different strengths who all actively seek to improve so we'll have a good shot at handling whatever comes down the pipe (and we get a lot of random stuff, from urgently needing to embed 3D modeling tools into our reporting app to needing to embed complex C++ simulation code or rewrite Fortran code into our largely CRUD Python app).

    Most of these cases of "focus on one niche" are often symptoms of lacking curiosity and just wanting to tick boxes to quality for a role. I'd much rather someone miss a few important boxes but tick a lot of random ones because they're curious; they'll take longer to on-board, but they'll likely be more useful long term.

    I don't work in the security space, but I think the same applies to most technical fields. Breadth of knowledge in an individual provides depth of knowledge in a team.

    now I know a fair amount about EE

    But, did you ever use a Smith's chart to assist in antenna design / analysis?

  • My take on how a decade (or more) of using cloud services for everything has seemingly deskilled the workforce.

    Just recently I found myself interviewing senior security engineers just to realize that in many cases they had absolutely no idea about how the stuff they supposedly worked with, actually worked.

    This all made me wonder, is it possible that over-reliance on cloud services for everything has massively deskilled the engineering workforce? And if it is so, who is going to be the European clouds, so necessary for EU's digital sovereignty?

    I did not copy-paste the post in here because of the different writing style, but I get no benefit whatsoever from website visits.

    That has been my experience with security people, too. They are button pushers and copy pasters. But I don't think it's cloud computing causing it. They were like that before clouds.

  • That and also - humans not knowing something can man up and learn it. When they need, they'll learn.

    And OP's question about European clouds - it depends really. A lot of what this endeavor needs is just advanced use of OpenStack. I'm confident there are plenty of people with such skills in the EU countries.

    As for the post content - I dunno, my experience with Kubernetes consists of using it, but not trying to understand or touch it too closely, because it stinks. Maybe those engineers were like that too.

    When they need, they'll learn.

    100% agree. But.
    If you are a principal engineer claiming to have experience hardening the thing, you would expect that learning to have already happened.
    Also, I would be absolutely fine with "I never had a chance to dig into this specifically, I just know it at a high level" answer. Why coming up with bs?

    Maybe those engineers were like that too.

    I mean, we are talking about people whose whole career was around Kubernetes, so I don't think so?

  • You were at screening level #1. When I applied for work in Manhattan in 1988 it was like that: 9/10 jobs you applied to weren't the actual employer, they were agents building a pool of candidates to be able to present to the actual employers at a moment's notice if the employer should ever actually call asking for candidates.

    Today I bet it's rare to get hired without at least 3 screenings before you actually meet the people you might be working with.

    Maybe, but that doesn't quite track with what I experienced. It was for a fairly well known company that builds industrial tools and machines, and I interviewed at their HQ, so I don't think it was an agency building a pool.

    The screening part sounds right, but I think these guys were doing it in-house.

  • That has been my experience with security people, too. They are button pushers and copy pasters. But I don't think it's cloud computing causing it. They were like that before clouds.

    Yeah, they are frequently just parroting things like CVE notices as highlighted by a fairly stupid scanning tool.

    The security ecosystem has been long diluted because no one wants to doubt a "security" person and be wrong, and over time that has made a pretty soft context for people to get credibility as a security person.

  • My take on how a decade (or more) of using cloud services for everything has seemingly deskilled the workforce.

    Just recently I found myself interviewing senior security engineers just to realize that in many cases they had absolutely no idea about how the stuff they supposedly worked with, actually worked.

    This all made me wonder, is it possible that over-reliance on cloud services for everything has massively deskilled the engineering workforce? And if it is so, who is going to be the European clouds, so necessary for EU's digital sovereignty?

    I did not copy-paste the post in here because of the different writing style, but I get no benefit whatsoever from website visits.

    Nah brah, knah waddahma? Running my own Nextcloud instance is basically what drove me to become a linux novice.

    I used to be a windows gamer. Now I run my own home-LLM server for the self hosted cloud assistant.

    People should try, it's fun!

  • Nah brah, knah waddahma? Running my own Nextcloud instance is basically what drove me to become a linux novice.

    I used to be a windows gamer. Now I run my own home-LLM server for the self hosted cloud assistant.

    People should try, it's fun!

    Juat as a reality check:
    What you and me consider fun isnt fun for moat outside of the lemmy techie bubble.

  • Maybe, but that doesn't quite track with what I experienced. It was for a fairly well known company that builds industrial tools and machines, and I interviewed at their HQ, so I don't think it was an agency building a pool.

    The screening part sounds right, but I think these guys were doing it in-house.

    That tracks with expectations. Many larger companies don't use external recruiters at all, I'd guess the threshold is probably around 10,000 employees - more or less - above that they'll have it vertically integrated in-house.

    I've worked with a 100,000 employee company where HR will pre-screen candidates at job fair type interviews, just to file them away against potential future openings. They won't usually task actual staff with doing interviews for openings that aren't funded, though sometimes it feels like they are doing that - sending so many bad-fit candidates that it takes us 8-10 to find one that might possibly be a net-positive asset to the team.

  • My take on how a decade (or more) of using cloud services for everything has seemingly deskilled the workforce.

    Just recently I found myself interviewing senior security engineers just to realize that in many cases they had absolutely no idea about how the stuff they supposedly worked with, actually worked.

    This all made me wonder, is it possible that over-reliance on cloud services for everything has massively deskilled the engineering workforce? And if it is so, who is going to be the European clouds, so necessary for EU's digital sovereignty?

    I did not copy-paste the post in here because of the different writing style, but I get no benefit whatsoever from website visits.

    nah, I was incompetent long before cloud services.

  • When they need, they'll learn.

    100% agree. But.
    If you are a principal engineer claiming to have experience hardening the thing, you would expect that learning to have already happened.
    Also, I would be absolutely fine with "I never had a chance to dig into this specifically, I just know it at a high level" answer. Why coming up with bs?

    Maybe those engineers were like that too.

    I mean, we are talking about people whose whole career was around Kubernetes, so I don't think so?

    Ah. OK. Yep, people lie in their CV's.

  • HMD is ‘scaling back’ in the US, killing Nokia all over again

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    101 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    realitista@lemmy.worldR
    They've also been reborn as a health devices manufacturer, Withings.
  • 89 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    67 Aufrufe
    S
    I suspect people (not billionaires) are realising that they can get by with less. And that the planet needs that too. And that working 40+ hours a week isn’t giving people what they really want either. Tbh, I don't think that's the case. If you look at any of the relevant metrics (CO², energy consumption, plastic waste, ...) they only know one direction globally and that's up. I think the actual issues are Russian invasion of Ukraine and associated sanctions on one of the main energy providers of Europe Trump's "trade wars" which make global supply lines unreliable and costs incalculable (global supply chains love nothing more than uncertainty) Uncertainty in regards to China/Taiwan Boomers retiring in western countries, which for the first time since pretty much ever means that the work force is shrinking instead of growing. Economical growth was mostly driven by population growth for the last half century with per-capita productivity staying very close to inflation. Disrupting changes in key industries like cars and energy. The west has been sleeping on may of these developments (e.g. electric cars, batteries, solar) and now China is curbstomping the rest of the world in regards to market share. High key interest rates (which are applied to reduce high inflation due to some of the reason above) reduce demand on financial investments into companies. The low interest rates of the 2010s and also before lead to more investments into companies. With interest going back up, investments dry up. All these changes mean that companies, countries and people in the west have much less free cash available. There’s also the value of money has never been lower either. That's been the case since every. Inflation has always been a thing and with that the value of money is monotonically decreasing. But that doesn't really matter for the whole argument, since the absolute value of money doesn't matter, only the relative value. To put it differently: If you earn €100 and the thing you want to buy costs €10, that is equivalent to if you earn €1000 and the thing you want to buy costing €100. The value of money dropping is only relevant for savings, and if people are saving too much then the economy slows down and jobs are cut, thus some inflation is positive or even required. What is an actual issue is that wages are not increasing at the same rate as the cost of things, but that's not a "value of the money" issue.
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    176 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • Teachers Are Not OK

    Technology technology
    18
    1
    253 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    97 Aufrufe
    curious_canid@lemmy.caC
    AI is so far from being the main problem with our current US educational system that I'm not sure why we bother to talk about it. Until we can produce students who meet minimum standards for literacy and critical thinking, AI is a sideshow.
  • Brain activity lower when using AI chatbots: MIT research

    Technology technology
    15
    1
    128 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    74 Aufrufe
    Z
    Depends how much clutch is left ‍
  • 118 Stimmen
    34 Beiträge
    135 Aufrufe
    S
    A fairer comparison would be Eliza vs ChatGPT.
  • 2 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    quarterswede@lemmy.worldQ
    I give it 5 years before this is on our phones.
  • Things at Tesla are worse than they appear

    Technology technology
    34
    1
    420 Stimmen
    34 Beiträge
    150 Aufrufe
    halcyon@discuss.tchncs.deH
    [image: a4f3b70f-db20-4c1d-b737-611548cf3104.jpeg]