Skip to content

Using Clouds for too long might have made you incompetent

Technology
82 31 0
  • 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.

  • 9 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    J
    Oh yeah, history has a habit of siding with tyrannical fuckwits like ALL THE TIME, you dumb fucking literal dickhead. Your head actually looks like a penis.
  • Create a Professional Logo with AI – Step-by-Step Digital Guide

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Pornaroma Review a Detailed Comparison with Top Adult Sites

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    4 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Comment utiliser ChatGPT : le guide complet - BDM

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • No JS, No CSS, No HTML: online "clubs" celebrate plainer websites

    Technology technology
    205
    2
    772 Stimmen
    205 Beiträge
    700 Aufrufe
    R
    Gemini is just a web replacement protocol. With basic things we remember from olden days Web, but with everything non-essential removed, for a client to be doable in a couple of days. I have my own Gemini viewer, LOL. This for me seems a completely different application from torrents. I was dreaming for a thing similar to torrent trackers for aggregating storage and computation and indexing and search, with search and aggregation and other services' responses being structured and standardized, and cryptographic identities, and some kind of market services to sell and buy storage and computation in unified and pooled, but transparent way (scripted by buyer\seller), similar to MMORPG markets, with the representation (what is a siloed service in modern web) being on the client native application, and those services allowing to build any kind of client-server huge system on them, that being global. But that's more of a global Facebook\Usenet\whatever, a killer of platforms. Their infrastructure is internal, while their representation is public on the Internet. I want to make infrastructure public on the Internet, and representation client-side, sharing it for many kinds of applications. Adding another layer to the OSI model, so to say, between transport and application layer. For this application: I think you could have some kind of Kademlia-based p2p with groups voluntarily joined (involving very huge groups) where nodes store replicas of partitions of group common data based on their pseudo-random identifiers and/or some kind of ring built from those identifiers, to balance storage and resilience. If a group has a creator, then you can have replication factor propagated signed by them, and membership too signed by them. But if having a creator (even with cryptographically delegated decisions) and propagating changes by them is not ok, then maybe just using whole data hash, or it's bittorrent-like info tree hash, as namespace with peers freely joining it can do. Then it may be better to partition not by parts of the whole piece, but by info tree? I guess making it exactly bittorrent-like is not a good idea, rather some kind of block tree, like for a filesystem, and a separate piece of information to lookup which file is in which blocks. If we are doing directory structure. Then, with freely joining it, there's no need in any owners or replication factors, I guess just pseudorandom distribution of hashes will do, and each node storing first partitions closest to its hash. Now thinking about it, such a system would be not that different from bittorrent and can even be interoperable with it. There's the issue of updates, yes, hence I've started with groups having hierarchy of creators, who can make or accept those updates. Having that and the ability to gradually store one group's data to another group, it should be possible to do forks of a certain state. But that line of thought makes reusing bittorrent only possible for part of the system. The whole database is guaranteed to be more than a normal HDD (1 TB? I dunno). Absolutely guaranteed, no doubt at all. 1 TB (for example) would be someone's collection of favorite stuff, and not too rich one.
  • Study finds persistent spike in hate speech on X

    Technology technology
    43
    1
    348 Stimmen
    43 Beiträge
    223 Aufrufe
    E
    You are a zionist so it's funny that you say that
  • 179 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 5 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet