- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
I’m applying to jobs, and the amount of AI assessments, rounds, AI interviewers, questionnaires, is nuts.
One of these emails for example,
It’s rough.
I’m applying to jobs, and the amount of AI assessments, rounds, AI interviewers, questionnaires, is nuts.
One of these emails for example,
It’s rough.
But who was hiring 5 junior devs?!
Did nothing they produced matter to anyone who knew better?
I can’t think of a better way to drive my organization into obsolescence, than to have 5 junior devs rampaging across the place leaving stupid mistakes in their wake.
I love having one or two junior devs around the office. On a large team (15 devs), there’s just enough deeply unimportant unimpactful harmless bullshit to keep two junior devs from doing too much damage.
Once, on a huge team (30+ senior devs split into squads), I had four junior devs at the same time.
That is the maximum I have ever allowed, and that was during a period of exceptional demand.
Anyway, I guess I just wish the folks replacing 5 junior devs with an AI equivalent to 5 junior devs the day they deserve. Lol.
I most places I worked in (all in Europe), Junior Devs are generally hired as an investment, since their productivity sucks until they become more experienced so the idea is to teach them until they become more senior.
You can’t really replace such Junior Devs with LLMs because the LLMs don’t learn (at best they’ll somewhat follow past guidelines still in their context until those guidelines are push out as the context fills over time).
Maybe in the US (were job security is a joke) there’s more a tendency to hire Junior Devs as cheap manpower.
Yes. Same here. I never would have managed to build teams as large as I have if I didn’t create some of my senior devs out of junior devs.
Yes. Exactly! It boggles my mind when folks talk about all the money they’re saving on junior devs. A forever-junior sounds terrible, to me - no matter how cheap.
Yes. When I was doing consulting gigs for clients too incompetent to maintain their own developer teams, I would hire junior devs and charge clients for their work. Organizations too incompetent to hire and retain their own developers are also pretty reliably too incompetent to tell the difference.
Even so - while I never felt I owed those (generally sociopathic, often malicious and usually willfully stupid) clients too much loyalty - professional ethics still meant that I didn’t saddle them with any fully un-supervised junior developers. So they were still better off with my consulting team than with an AI.
An extra problem is that AI heavily favours bullshitters. It destroys the capability and cues to recognize them.
The tech job market is now a lemon market for both sides - neither applicants nor companies can reasonably know what’s really offered to them, and what is made up.
They can, though. You can’t get one paragraph into an LLM slop document before it is obviously completely vacuous. They make pages and pages of text and seldom arrive at any kind of point. They also are very repetitive in ways that humans simply are not. Furthermore, if you want to be sure someone’s not spewing LLM BS at you and don’t trust your own ability to discern it, talk to them in person and see if they communicate similarly to how they did before.
Everyone seems to be allergic to to the idea of de-automating the hiring process, despite the fact that the automation has totally gone off the rails for all parties. Put up a sign! Post your business address online and accept paper applications. Do all interviewing face to face.
Job hunters dont have the power to fix the problem, but talent seekers totally do, so my sympathy for their plight is exactly zero. If you don’t like your results, surely doing the same thing even harder will work! Trying something different is madness!