[ExI] Book: THE LIGHTS IN THE TUNNEL
sjatkins at mac.com
Fri Jun 4 20:29:55 UTC 2010
Adrian Tymes wrote:
> --- On Fri, 6/4/10, Tom Nowell <nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> If these jobs do exist en
>> masse, they're not hiring anywhere near where I live
> Moving may sometimes help with finding new jobs. For
> example, it is much easier to find work as a software
> engineer, or almost anything having to do with biotech,
> in Silicon Valley than in most rural areas in the US.
> (It is somewhat easier than many other urban areas,
> too, but most of the time if this advice applies, the
> one being advised is living in an area that does not
> have much employment at all - though often just enough
> to offer a slim, and often false, hope of maybe
> finding a job locally.)
> The relative ease of finding work in cities is a
> large part of why urbanization happened, and is
> continuing to happen. ("Relative" must be emphasized,
> though: that can be 50% odds of finding a job vs. 15%,
> or 5% vs. 0%. Either way, it's higher.)
>> Adrian also wrote in a different message on the same topic
>> that if people find themselves without marketable skills,
>> they will retrain themselves until they do have marketable
>> skills. Again, my reality shows this requires a lot of work
>> and no short-term prospects of a new job.
> This is true. I was refuting the concept of permanent
> unemployment (as in, you'd never have a job again, not even
> in 10 or 20 or 100 years, no matter what you did). While
> there is short term unemployment, people can and do
> eventually retrain themselves given a long enough drought of
> work. Sorry if this was not clear.
>> For all you may
>> study subjects, there's no qualification employers like more
>> than recent experience in a similar role, so skills without
>> work experience will put you behind people with experience
>> in the interview shortlisting.
> Trick: claim recent experience doing X for a non-profit
> operation, that you've been doing on the side while looking
> for work. As it happens, said non-profit is also a sole
> proprietorship, and you are your own supervisor. (Without
> the corpspeak, this is "I've been doing X as a hobby". The
> corpspeak shows that you can think of X as a formal,
> organized project, compatible with being done in a business
In software, create or join an Open Source and get a bit of a name as at
least a contributor. You hone skills, have references and build a
>> Also, employers prefer formal qualifications to informal
> Software engineering in the dot-com era - which, granted,
> was about 10 years ago. But still, one can get into
> industries without formal study when there's a need.
Actually, employers prefer someone that can demonstrate some skill in an
interview and have a reference or two. They may not pay you as much as
someone with more experience if you are new to the area but they will be
delighted to have someone with half a demonstrable brain. There are
tons and tons of people with great formal credentials and years of
experience who fail miserably in the interview to convince anyone they
have what it takes for the job. The only trick is getting to the
interview for a newcomer.
>> Furthermore, qualifications that are
>> obviously commercially valuable tend to be priced more
>> highly - look at how much it costs for Microsoft's MCSE
> HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...
Not worth the paper it is written on. These things are not going to
convince a savvy interview team you can do anything but collect credentials.
> MCSE, like most vendor-provided qualifications in the
> software industry, is bullshit and worthless. Few
> employers I know care about it, except for low-wage jobs.
> The only "formal qualification" that counts is a college
> degree - BS or higher - in Computer Science or a
> relevant field. Granted, that does cost money to get,
> though there exist scholarships and student loans for
> precisely this reason.
I don't even care about a college degree in software. I care about
experience of any kind including open source. I care much more about a
burning passion to create and demonstrable skill (in the interview) at
software design and implementation. I have interviewed countless MS
and higher people who can't demonstrably think, design or code their way
out of a paper bag and don't demonstrably know even the most fundamental
of algorithms well enough to use it in a toy problem much less bend and
mutilate it a bit. I have interviewed countless experienced people who
have done some good even great thinks in the past but are burned out and
are only looking for a paycheck for investing as little of themselves as
possible. They are too bored or something usually to actually do well
with interview questions. If they do reasonably well but that spark is
low then I may recommend them hoping it can be reignited.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat