Having worked in the tech industry for a while now, I'm convinced there must be something better than the corporate hustle and grind. So let’s talk about an alternative approach, away from futile corporate overlords and maybe a move towards a collective anarchist commune.

The Problem with Payouts

Why do tech workers get paid so well? Because we produce an absurd amount of value and software is basically infinitely reproducible at–relatively speaking–zero cost. This of course has led to companies that want the best talent offering them top dollar which has become a kind of badge of honor by my fellow engineers.

And, in my biased opinion we should be well compensated, but here enters a problem. If we’re building all this value and tech is basically responsible for keeping the US economy growing like it is, why are we not compensated even better and why don’t we have better job security?

In theory we are compensated so well because we're an extremely smart workforce. Yet decision making is disproportionately captured by a small group of stakeholders. Stakeholders who are so removed from the problem space that they can’t possibly be able to make well informed decisions about the work. Then they are disproportionately compensated for outcomes that they–arguably–didn’t contribute to. Why are we not treated as partners in the value creation proposition? Being closer to the metal gives engineers an eye on the problem and domain space that people higher up on the food chain just lack the context. We are more than just highly valued cogs in the machine. We are domain experts that can inform the direction of the product to mitigate risk and maximize value.

I don’t want to oversell the engineer’s contribution to making a successful product, because I do think it is extremely important that a teamwork game requires teamwork. So we should also acknowledge the other roles that do help build software. Like, Product Management is there to give voice to the user of the software. While Design is there to make sure the product is aesthetically pleasing and easily understood. All of these parts work together to make a better product.

While having a visionary auteur can create amazing works of art (and on occasions software). It is very difficult to find such visionaries that are really capable of possessing the deep, wide-ranging expertise required to make every critical decision, from the grandest idea to the smallest detail. And while I understand design by committee is a special place in hell, however, leveraging a team’s knowledge and expertise to help inform the product does usually create a better product.

End to Fiefdoms

I never understood the idea of wanting to silo knowledge. I personally hate being the sole point of contact for anything. Don’t get me wrong, I love helping people. But you know, I wouldn’t want to be guilted into never taking a vacation because I’ve hoarded all the knowledge.

I also don’t believe in rockstar developers. I’ve actually met a few, and the ones I’ve met are good people that are able to pick up code bases from smell alone (exaggeration, they're just very intuitive). But I’ve also heard anecdotes about rockstar devs that have problematic personalities that get a pass from management because they're considered too valuable to the company. So they become a missing stair and people just have to walk around them.

But why should anyone have to put up with that? You shouldn’t have to put up with toxic people because they "keep the lights on." Anyone can write code, but the only thing that makes a rockstar invaluable is the context no one else has. That’s why we need to break down knowledge silos, to ensure a person's value isn't tied to being the only one with domain-specific knowledge.

No one should have to put up with toxic coworkers. And even outside of just that, everyone should be able to take vacation. Being the sole contact for niche systems is too much for one person. No one person should be the load-bearing wall of an entire company.

Die a Hero

The industry expects heroics. But heroes die and don’t even get to be martyrs. It just leads to burn out and wastes talent. This shouldn’t be normal. Heaven forbid we have sustainable work. Hyper growth at all cost does come at a human cost, which inevitably leads to burn out and leads to software entropy.

What do I mean by that? Working 80+ hour weeks. Working weekends. Never taking vacations because software needs to be shipped. Arbitrary deadlines. Gaps in processes that no one else can or wants to work on. Teams not communicating with each other. Being handed someone else’s code base that has no documentation and is the embodiment of spaghetti code. Never refactoring to improve a code base. Leaving dependencies to languish until there is a security vulnerability that requires an upgrade, but there are so many breaking changes that the upgrade becomes pure unadulterated madness. Random one off logic that violates the source of truth, making it near impossible to find where this is happening. Build processes that take hours to see if your change actually fixed a bug, because there is no way to unit test it. Fixing a bug in production and bypassing the dev environment. And there is just so much more…

We don’t need heroics to ship software. We can actually distribute the burden. Call me crazy, but we don’t need rockstars that single handedly create amazing software. Instead we level everyone up to be just as good as the rockstar and spread context and decision making with XP practices.

Like Steve Jobs said, “Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you.”

There are no rockstar developers, because we all are capable of being rockstars. We don’t need to martyr developers to release software, because we can all bear the burden to ship software. There is nothing special about big tech. Everything they can do, anyone can do.

Craftsmanship

With the rise of AI generated code, we’re putting out more slop that will lead to poorly maintained code bases that it becomes even harder to understand and becomes even harder to work on. The idea of software on-demand (the idea of generating software by LLM as you need it, not to be confused with SaaS) is moderately intriguing but I think I’d like my calculators and bank accounts to be a bit more deterministic, so I don’t think we can really rely purely on the vibes to do anything that requires a definitive source of truth.

And from my personal experience the best way to improve and maintain the craft of software engineering has been through eXtreme Programming. I’m not entirely discounting AI as a force multiplier on productivity, but I don’t think it’ll come from writing code, but instead as a tool to quickly look up documentation and handling repetitive tasks. So the idea of focusing and improving the human skill I still think will be more valuable than cutting humans out of the coding loop.

From my own personal anecdotal experience of trying to code with AI, it is overly zealous at giving you a working solution that misses very obvious edge cases. That said, it is a force multiplier on looking up documentation (unless you’re working with a library that is too new for it to have been trained on) or giving quick possible alternatives that I may not have thought about. And I do believe not only will humans still create better, more reliable, and safer code, but for continued maintenance of software systems, it is important that humans are able to understand the code. After all, when something goes wrong, AI isn’t going to be able to fix incomprehensible code base that itself generated. So the idea of cutting humans out of the loop and going towards entirely software on demand seems short sighted to me. Instead we should be investing in human skills.

I personally am making the bet that humans will continue for the foreseeable future to write better code than generative LLM. And AGI, Super Intelligence and the singularity aren’t years away but instead are decades away. The last mile problem, the same thing that prevents self-driving cars from taking over the roads, is also the same problem that will prevent LLMs from taking software jobs.

Transparency and Trust

Organizations seem to often “us vs them.” So what if we kill that. One of the reasons I believe in XP is because I do actually trust that people can self organize to solve problems and are intelligent enough to make the best decision they can with what context they have. And if it is wrong, we pivot and course correct as soon as possible.

Developers should be able to help influence business goals and priorities. Decision making should not be edicts from above but instead be a collaboration. Give people the benefit of a doubt that we hired them because they’re smart and able to make well informed decisions given all the context as leadership.

Which also gets to the solution. A flat org. No gods or kings. Only man (like mankind, not to exclude women or anything).

The Solution

To address all these problems that I see, I think what I’d like to do is to create a tech co-op. A company owned by the employees. Because it is owned and operated by the employees in a more fair and equitable way it means the co-op can focus on sustainability and not hyper growth.

XP can solve knowledge silos and level up devs to be all the same level of rockstar.

A flat org combats fiefdoms.

Most decisions should be pushed down to the team level, but in the case a larger disagreement occurs and a tiebreaker is necessary or maybe a decision that affects the organization itself, there will be a benevolent dictator model where the current CEO/General Manager will make the decision.

To also help enforce the benevolent dictator and conform with XP practices, the CEO position will be paired on and rotated. The CEO position would be a one-year rotation, with one of the two paired leads rotating every six months.

Compensation will be a formula. So everyone will know what everyone else is making. The co-op's finances will also be reported yearly offering full transparency on the finance of the co-op and where we are making investments.

Yearly pitch new ideas contest and vote by employees to help propose and shape the direction of the co-op. Followed by a lean startup to test the viability of the pitch for a few months where it will be measured and validated to see if the co-op should invest more into it, or pivot it, or just kill it and move on.

Knowledge is Power

One of the reasons that I personally love XP is the hands-on mentorship you get while working. If you want to know how I see XP working, you can check out this article I wrote.

So I’m thinking, pair on everything. Not just programming, but also even product management, and design. And take it even further with sales, marketing, leadership, operations & infrastructure, security, data science, customer support, finance, and people operations, and legal (with some caveats). And not only do we pair, but we also rotate members between these roles to make more well balanced employees that have a systemic view of the company and the problems to bring new insights and solutions.

The more teams a member is on, and the more roles a member has participated on, the more valuable they are to the co-op and in turn they are compensated more for it.

No negotiations, only transparency

How infuriating is it that you have the same role, tenure, and responsibilities as a peer but they make more money than you, because they negotiated better than you did. What if we didn’t have to be used car salesmen when accepting a job offer? What if a company was transparent about what everyone makes, and raises was a formula that you can plug your experience into and understand what you’ll be making in 5 or 10 years from now?

There is a history of systemic pay inequity and a lack of fairness in compensation in the industry. The current opaque negotiation system disproportionately disadvantages minority groups, women, and those lacking the social capital or experience to effectively haggle.

So to combat this problem, I’m going to give everyone, regardless of role, the same base salary. From there, raises will be based on years of tenure, number of roles in the team (this way we can train employees to be able to be engineers, designers, and product management), and number of teams you’ve worked on (employees will be encouraged to rotate between teams at least once a year). Because compensation is tied to making an employee more skilled and knowledgeable about various domains and on top of that more empathetic to other roles, employees should be compensated for it. We are all stronger together and thus compensation should match a more flexible employee that is able to do more.

In Office

Controversial hot take, but I do think there is a lot of benefit with in-person collaboration. I do admit that online tools have made remote work much better than where it used to be. But I still believe that there is context and knowledge sharing that is just much easier when done in person.

It’s easier to get context when you are able to overhear watercooler conversations. Easier to have ad-hoc conversations when you can just walk up to a person and ask for their opinion. And recurring team building activities.

A Healthy Workforce is a More Productive Workforce

Staying healthy is important. Not only are healthy employees going to be more resilient, happier, and more productive. Less sick days. Less medical bills. Better sleep. Better mood regulation. Better mental health. All this makes for a better company and working environment.

So how do we keep the workforce healthy? We build exercise into the workday. Every employee gets one hour during business hours for physical activity - running, cycling, weight training, yoga, calisthenics, whatever works for them. This isn't optional time off - it's part of the job, because a healthy workforce is a more productive workforce.

Proof of Concept

I can hear all the tech bros now. "Ho ho ho, all these pretty idealistic words from some naive young engineer (I'm 41 as of writing). Sure, these communist ideals sound good on paper, but it'll never work in the real world."

Guess what! I'm not that original. Tech co-ops have been tried in the past and turns out can be successful. There is a community-maintained list of co-ops at tech-coop.xyz. These aren't struggling idealistic experiments - they're profitable, sustainable businesses that have found a better way to organize.

And here is a highlight of just a few:

Online Computer Library Centre

An American nonprofit co-op that categorizes books. The founder, Frederick Kilgour, described it as, "merge the latest information storage and retrieval system of the time, the computer, with the oldest, the library."

CoLab

Another American co-op that started in Ithaca, New York. They use technology to create and support social, economic, and environmental justice.

Loomio

Started in Wellington, New Zealand as a response to the Occupy Wellington movement. They create remote collaborative and consensus software.

Tech Co-op: The Next Generation of Big Tech

The dystopian cyberpunk future isn't just approaching, we're already living in its early stages of late stage capitalism attempting to enshittify our lives. But all hope is not lost. We do have the tools to reclaim power from the corporate overlords that seek to control our lives through the screen. We can eat the rich by siphoning money away from them to the rest of us by simply building what they organizationally cannot do.

I think a tech co-op is exactly what's needed to combat the stagnation of Big Tech. While they once championed being different from traditional large corporations, they have really turned into what they claim not to be.

The ideal naivety of early tech, taking a moral high ground, is easy to believe when you see hypergrowth in an emergent market. But once market expectations start to apply a bit of pressure, it's surprising how quick those moral ideals are compromised.

I still believe in those ideals. I still think tech can be a force for good in this world and not just a reason for big money to turn its money into more money. We can hold to those ideals if we distribute the decision-making and empower every member, so that it doesn't become the conviction of a few to hold the moral line. Through practices like transparent pay, a flat organization, and collective ownership, we can build a more sustainable and equitable future. That is why I believe a tech co-op is the solution.

Big Tech isn’t going to save us. We have to save ourselves. That’s why I want to build a co-op. And if you’re tired of waiting for a better future, you should too.

Before I start ranting, this situation is my fault. It's been over a year since I graduated in Computer Science. I have little to nothing to show for it. I know the job market is ultra-competitive right now but it's still my responsibility to work with what I have, and I haven't been.

I realized during the five years I've studied Computer Science that even though I love video-games and thought robotics was alright (I did robotics programming in highschool & during my senior project, mentored by AmazonRobotics), I have no confidence in programming, and frankly, problem-solving in general. Everything is so reliant on connecting/social engineering now that my anti-social ass hasn't been doing. My parents have gotten people from my church and extended family, to give advice to me and frankly I've mostly been ignoring them when they repeat the same stuff I've been hearing for a while now. I apply to X position a family/family friend tells me to apply to, I get rejected/ghosted, repeat ad-nauseam until I stopped applying months down the line out of frustration, lying to them saying "yeah I applied to plenty of places". Confidence is at an all-time low.

Today my mom yells at me on how much I've been freeloading and threatens to kick me out, and I couldn't talk back at her because I know she's right.

For the short-term, I have $2,700 in my bank account, pretty much nothing to live on my own for. I hate being around my family but really want a remote position to show to my parents ASAP, so I don't get the boot. At this point I don't care what field it is, it doesn't have to be CS/programming--I really want to get a remote job in SOMETHING I can tolerate, in the next couple weeks or so while I try and gather my bearings for my future, or else I am likely getting kicked out. Preferably something that doesn't get too in the way of me studying for certs.

For the long-term, If it helps, again, I have a Bachelor's in Computer Science, a AWS Certified Cloud Practitioner certification, and am currently studying for the CompTIA A+ certification because I figured maybe I can try the IT space if I hate programming so much (already paid for a voucher, planning to take the exam in ~2 weeks). Unfortunately had no real work experience/internships in the Comp. Sci. field as I was too busy just trying not to drop out; took me 5 years to graduate. I've worked Doordash for a couple months using the family car, until my parents forbade me from doing so (for asinine reasons but it's their car so I can't talk back). I thought I was passionate in programming, I'm not. I have pretty much no passion in anything except games and anime, both industries sound awful to actually work in. Last week I started brainstorming a Unity game since I randomly thought it would be nice to work on something, anything, and put it on GitHub.

I'm well-aware that my story is not rare. Again, this is my fault. I've been too passive, and arrogant. But today I might as well ask for advice, both for the short and long-term. Thank you.

So I am working in a company where due to IP, security and export control considerations particular to my industry, almost all AI dev tools including Cursor, Github Copilot and Claude Code are banned. All we use is a locally hosted and pretty old ChatGPT installation which isn't that great.

That's fine, I can still do my work as I have always done, however I have already started to see dev and QA job ads stating commercial experience with dev tools like Cursor as mandatory. EDIT - I have a small amount of commercial experience in Copilot but only that tool and from a previous role. Not enough that would impress a recruiter.

It is possible that I could use side projects to get and show competence, however I have spoken to two local tech recruiters who say that they only consider commercial work experience in a tool or language as valid experience, so no side projects. Such is the competitive job market in my area. EDIT - some in another subreddit suggested freelance work or open source as options, which are great for learning the tools at least.

I have no immediate risk of being laid off, however I am concerned that is it ever happens, not having that AI dev tool experience could leave me effectively unemployable. One dev I asked for advice suggested I change jobs immediately. I love my job and am paid well, so would be very conflicted to leave just because of this.

What would you do if you were me?

Hoping someone could point me in the right direction. I feel like an idiot for not saving but someone in this sub mentioned a (government I think ?) program for training folks in COBOL. It will help with providing you an internship

I went to a T10 and got a Bachelor’s degree in CS, with a concentration in AI. But none of my roles were AI-related and it was standard front end/backend work. Now that everyone is trying to jump into AI, I’ve checked out some roles, but they all require multiple years of experience with AI tools and suites. I’m curious what I can do to actually make use of my previous training in AI and get one of these new AI roles. Surely having some academic background counts for something?

Hello!
A question for experienced engineers, curious if this 'bias' still applies nowadays despite the mass layoffs. I assume this matters less the more senior you get? Maybe it still applies to mid levels. But might not be relevant to 5 YOE and above.

Might be a rant, might not, but I’m feeling kinda lost right now. I’ve got an associates degree and about two years of internship experience, but I’m still not getting callbacks. I’ve done a bunch of personal projects, but it feels like no matter how many I build, it’s never enough. Even if I can get in front of a recruiter via networking, it feels like I get shot down before getting the chance to interview.

That’s what got me thinking, what kind of project actually turns heads anymore? Making a CRUD app or even building your own neural network doesn’t really seem to cut it these days. It feels like I have to use the latest AI tech (RAG for example) in some crazy way to get noticed. For context, my side projects include a Sentence Toxicity Classifier (using a RNN), a SIEM/SOAR pipeline to test things with Splunk, a Discord music bot, and a handful of other projects I thought were pretty solid. I always figured showing that I work on stuff in my own time would help me stand out, but if everyone’s doing the same, how do I actually separate myself?

Do I really need to go all out and build a full blown website with the latest AI tech just to get a call from a recruiter? What projects are actually impressive in today’s job market? Not complaining, just genuinely curious and lost right now as im sure many of us are.

Do you think software engineering roles or AI/ML engineering roles will be more in demand?

I am a SWE with 4 YOE, but the recently advancements in AI/ML is making me consider focusing on this area.

What are your thoughts? Area is oversaturated

I’m based in asia, but I think the situation should translate across regions.

Always wanted to be a ML researcher, but studied non STEM subject in bachelors. lucked my way into a decent ML msc and landed a full time research assistant role for DL, working on some computational problems (deep learning, database structure, binary trees)

i just accepted an offer to be a functionally tech sales, in a large company. Basically have to build applications with their LLM and sell it. I don’t think I like it but it pays better, And it’s a big company so I gave it a shot. I also had no luck with PhDs because of my bachelors

If I do my year here, is it over for my dream to working as a ML researcher? I was technically already a ML researcher with my old company, and I really do like that work a lot more than this corporate bs. But the pay is almost doubled at this new role. any thoughts?

Can I take a course offered somewhere on ML or something or do I have to get a masters degree for an AI role?

I'd imagine this will be quite a contrast to these posts from 2023 and 2024:

https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/18ds9ke/does_your_company_pay_for_your_chatgpt/

https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/1cy06us/ai_will_replace_us_all_but_in_the_meantime_my/

I've read a lot of different questions and suggestions on things early developers might want to consider but this is one I actually haven't heard as much and something I wish I had started doing day 1 of my career.

When I started out my focus was on trying to learn software development. I'd take a bit of time each week to dig into the technologies I was using at work to try and find non-functional areas we could improve in as I was grinding out functional stuff. over time this built up to an okay understanding of the SDLC overall.

there are plenty of areas I'm still not very strong, but at this point I have enough experience with enough different things that its relatively uncommon i encounter problems totally out of band from what I've seen before, and have a fairly decent understanding of many of the popular technologies used today across a wide span of problems.

Ive worked in a lot of different domains over my career. ive generally left most of the parsing of those domains to domain experts. sure, I'd pick up things here or there, enough exposure to particular verticals will do that, but I generally focused my time and energy on developing my tech knowledge, as it is more portable between jobs than domain specific stuff.

that said, I can now see the limits of this approach. I've been working in the same shop now for four years and I wish I had spent a little bit of time each week better learning the domain I am working in from first principles. I dont feel like I am lacking in technical ability. I have enough technical tools at my disposal. I feel I am lacking in domain specific insight, and so are the others surrounding me.

If i had been studying my current domain a little bit more here and there over the past 4 years, I suspect I wouldn't feel this way. I suspect I would be able to crack some of the tough nut problems we've been dealing with sensibly.

looking back, there were plenty of times in past roles where I wasnt able to see the forest for the trees as a result of a little too much domain blindness & outsourcing of that knowledge to others who perhaps didn't know the domain all that well either.

anyways, the advice I wish I had gotten was to carve out a bit of time for myself to learn the domain I was working in outside of the context of tech and programming. SWE skills are important, and most of the time we can learn the bits and pieces of a domain we need at the time, but some insights are locked behind both a general understanding of the tech and the domain.

I’m a student planning to study Computer Science, with a strong interest in AI and automation. I enjoy coding and building tools that make processes more efficient, and I know that right now the pay for software related jobs is very attractive.

But I’m worried about the long-term future of the field. It feels like we’re in the middle of a tech boom, and I’m concerned that by the 2030s the demand might decline. There are already so many software engineers, and I keep hearing about oversaturation in the market, would people even hire from junior devs?

For those already working in tech or following industry trends:

• what does the future look like for software engineers, AI/ML engineers, and other CS-related careers in the next 10 to 20 years?
• Will the demand still be strong, or will it taper off?

I am 2nd year student studying computer science and I have an interest in ML/AI gained through working on a bit of AI research at my university this year. This research work was very enjoyable and something I would like to pursue, however with a PHD being required to get into it I don't want to go down the route just because it's enjoyable if it is low paid and not worth the years of studying/postgrad.

What are the likely career options in this area after a PHD?

For context, I'm a DevOps Engineer with 6 years of experience (with a brief 1,5 years gap as Fullstack Engineer).

I like what I do, the technologies I work with, but to be honestly blunt, I'm getting tired of other people bullshit crazy complex systems. More and more I see myself craving to be working in a field with a smaller scope that's much more self contained.

Assuming you have all the time in the world to transition, what would you recommend? Open to any suggestion.

As a concrete example of what I see myself doing, I loved the https://www.nand2tetris.org/ courses. There's this book about compilers/interpreters (https://craftinginterpreters.com/) that is on my list. Is it realistic to consider learning a lot about languages/compilers/etc and get a job remotely in this area (say, a Go language developer)? 

I'm from Portugal, so that's something to consider.

Hey all! I am currently applying for roles at FAANG and FAANG-adjacent companies.

Here is my experience in a nutshell:

(1) BS degree in CS (graduated 16 years ago)

(2) Worked 2 years at a mid-size tech company (~5000 employees), desktop development using C#

(3) Spent 5 years completing a PhD in a related/adjacent scientific field (not CS). Coded daily in C# (for desktop) Matlab, Python (for data analysis), and C/C++ (for embedded/firmware)

(4) 5 more years working as a “research engineer” within academia. Continued using all the same technologies (C#, C/C++, Matlab, Python). Also added Xamarin/.NET MAUI to the list (for C# mobile dev)

(5) The most recent 4 years working as a “research engineer” at a small company (less than 20 people). Continued using many of the same technologies. Added Flask (for Python server-side stuff), tensorflow (for Python ML stuff), Flutter (for more mobile dev), and have also learned KiCad (for circuit board design), and still heavily work with C/C++ for firmware dev and C#/.NET MAUI for mobile dev. Also added Godot for game dev over the past year.

16 years total experience. I love my job and everything I work on, but unfortunately I’ve max’d out my salary potential at the small org that I’m at. I was hoping I could earn a lot more by going to FAANG.

Given my experience, what level do y’all think I should try to apply for?

Hey guys. So I am a bcom(H) graduate from du and now have a gap of 2 years due to government exams. Now, I have decided to move on and shift towards Data science/ Analytics or Business Analyst.

Questions here are: 1. Are the courses/certification from Coursera/Udemy/microsoft to learn skills like python,sql,r,powerbi,ml basics relevant for today's job market? And side by side I would be making projects from kraggle, bootcamp, GitHub to build by resume. 2. Chatgpt has been suggesting me to go for Google+IBm Data analytics professional certification but some people have told me they are useless. 3. Should I skip all this and go for masters in data science? I have zero knowledge how to get into it as b.com graduate. 4. I was also thinking of IIT JAM as option for courses like mathmatics+statistics aligning with data science. 5. Just MBA from a tier-2/3 college due to my gap years?

Thankyou for reading!

I recently graduated from a safety/last chance university in Canada, and learned pretty quickly in my internship at a small company I very much do not know enough for a SWE role. I know it's entirely my fault for not taking my education seriously and I'm going through Odin Project to teach myself what I should have learned. I'm currently working part time as a cashier but I'm hoping to swap to an entry level, ideally white collar, role while I'm doing that. I've been looking at data entry and entry level IT roles. Is there anything else that would be a good fit for my situation?

Im currently a student at SJSU for SE. I came into the school wanting to do CS/heard from social media that the location alone makes it easy to get your foot into the industry with connections. However, for numerous reasons, I really don't want to stay in the major of SE anymore and want to swap to an adjacent major but im conflicted. I applied and got accepted into SFSU for CS which would actually allow me to commit to computer science but people say the school is trash, program is horrible, no actual company goes to that school, and if given the opportunity choose SJSU instead. On the flip-side, I was thinking of potentially swapping to an "adjacent" major such as data science or math then getting a minor in CS which would allow me to stay in SJSU to stay near the "opportunities" in sj but I wouldn't be doing directly CS and it's not necessarily a major I'm too passionate about and additionally, doing a non-cs degree while trying to get into SWE sounds like I'd be screwing myself more.

Hi all, I have been interviewing with a software company for a C++ role for over two months. 2 screenings( one by the recruiter and one by the hr), One hackerrank, two technical rounds, followed by one with hiring manager and one with head of the department. So in total 5 rounds(excluding screening call). It's been 2 weeks since the last one and they came back and want to schedule one more technical round. I am not sure how to take it that they want to have a technical round after cultural round. Is it that they have another strong candidate already in line and they want to have another round to make sure to reject me?.

I'm 33 years old, undergrad in CS, grad in data science. I have worked in data analytics for over 6 years (SQL, Python, Tableau, basic data pipelines), teach data analytics to undergrad/grad students as side-gig (adjunct professor), and been software development for almost 2 years (React, Vue, mostly front-end stuff). I also help less experienced data analyst in our division with queries, and lead data analytics workshops at work.

My career journey has been weird, and it's mostly been chasing connections that has got me to where I'm at. A lot of my co-workers and ex-bosses have wanted me to tag along, and I've been chasing money and benefits without really think of much anything else.

The problem is: I've never had to work very deep in any of this. My React App is a very barebones. We have only just started using ADO for version control (I'm a solo dev there and out EIT department is just now requiring it).

My data analytics projects have never been complex SQL. I know CTEs, windows functions, and enough to get the job done.

I've built a few regression models that have gone nowhere. Companies are slowly finding out that "simpler" analysis brings much more realistic results than a fancy model.

I've built very small data pipelines (Data scraping with Python -> clean in python -> SQL) to clean data and have built some very barebones schemas.

But I look at the job market and everything is progressing at a much faster rate than what I know. I'm afraid I'm being left behind with my age, new technologies, and knowing many tools but not being great at any of them.

Thoughts on this? Thanks for listening.

Currently a technical product manager trying to see if it’s smart to get back into a more technical role. Have 2 years of help desk and app support experience and a year and a half of TPO/PM experience. If I were to go would go in a more cloud or security role. Specifically SecOps or IAM. Open to a GRC path as well. Anyone make the switch?

How Walmart's Kickback Scandal Exposes Silicon Valley's Staffing Underground

https://www.ctol.digital/news/walmart-fires-vp-kickbacks-terminates-1200-contractors/

Hi,

What is your opinion on Stealth Startup?

I've seen so many people who apparently are founders, or have some nice role at Stealth Startup.

How is it seen to new opportunities/HR?

My friend is suggesting I do something similar, since for about a year I ran a digital agency and closed it fater a year, and they say it can seem in a bad way?

thoughts?

I'm not focused much in finding a job right now, im working on a new startup and already am talking with some investors for seed investment, but i've seen the face of them when i said my last business was a digital agency. Which it wasnt just that, we also published 2 SaaS tools during that year of production.

What do you think of this?

Hey folks,

I’m experimenting with an idea and want to work closely with a handful of devs over the next 3 months. The goal: help you clean up parts of your codebase that feel painful to touch or modify.

This isn’t about rewriting everything, just improving those spots that eat too much of your time — things like:

• Refactoring a giant method or class into something more manageable
• Adding missing unit tests so changes feel safer
• Fixing low-hanging fruit that keeps causing small bugs or friction

I’m offering this for free, but I only have 5 slots (to make sure I can actually help each team). What's your gain ? - you save your time and just merge the code.

The only requirement: you should have at least some messy or hard-to-maintain code that slows you down.

If this sounds useful, DM me. Let’s make your codebase a little less scary.