In a Sea of Tech Talent, Companies Can't Find the Workers They Want (wsj.com) 106
Tech companies are struggling to fill AI-specialized roles despite a surplus of available tech talent. U.S. colleges more than doubled the number of computer science degrees awarded between 2013 and 2022. Major layoffs at Google, Meta, and Amazon flooded the job market. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts businesses will employ 6% fewer computer programmers in 2034 than last year. The disconnect stems from companies seeking workers with specific AI expertise.
Runway CEO Cristobal Valenzuela estimates only hundreds of people worldwide possess the skills to train complex AI models. His company advertises base salaries up to $490,000 for a director of machine learning. Daniel Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week. The WSJ story includes the example of one James Strawn, who was laid off from Adobe over the summer after 25 years as a senior software quality-assurance engineer. The 55-year-old has had one interview since his layoff. Matt Massucci, CEO of recruiting firm Hirewell, told the publication companies can automate some low-level engineering tasks and redirect that money to high-end talent.
Runway CEO Cristobal Valenzuela estimates only hundreds of people worldwide possess the skills to train complex AI models. His company advertises base salaries up to $490,000 for a director of machine learning. Daniel Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week. The WSJ story includes the example of one James Strawn, who was laid off from Adobe over the summer after 25 years as a senior software quality-assurance engineer. The 55-year-old has had one interview since his layoff. Matt Massucci, CEO of recruiting firm Hirewell, told the publication companies can automate some low-level engineering tasks and redirect that money to high-end talent.
Poor James (Score:5, Insightful)
James Strawn, who was laid off from Adobe over the summer after 25 years as a senior software quality-assurance engineer.
I can only assume that for the past decade, James has been ignored, or terrible at his job. Every Adobe product has gotten progressively worse to use, forums are filled with bug reports that get ignored release after release, and the increase in system requirements do not reflect improvements in functionality.
Whether because Adobe didn't like what he had to say, or they decided not to listen to him, it's completely unsurprising that he lost his job.
The folks offering $500K/year for AI experts aren't going to take anyone who makes the claim on a resume, they're almost guaranteed to be looking to poach someone at OpenAI or Google. Practically speaking, they're looking to benefit from the experience that those companies paid for...and James doesn't have it.
On the upswing, odds are pretty good that James will have a job in short order, helping to deal with the fallout of 'vibe coders' who don't know how to do real-world testing. He's probably going to run into some combination of age discrimination and salary discrimination (no way he's working for $60K if he has 25 years at Adobe), but once the messes start being too big to ignore, I'm pretty sure he'll be able to become a project manager that helps direct fixes for deployed code that didn't get actual-QA. The need is most definitely there, it'll just take a bit more time to prove to the brass that he's more valuable to the company than the MBAs that are looking at their now-spherical product for more corners to cut.
Re:Poor James (Score:5, Insightful)
On the upswing, odds are pretty good that James will have a job in short order, helping to deal with the fallout of 'vibe coders' who don't know how to do real-world testing.
I'm already seeing bizarre corporate fallout from this - when a high value, highly paid individual "vibe codes" something that gets traction and then the executive team declares "now put it in production" and the legitimate questions are asked like "what are the requirements? how does it work? what are the dependencies? What are the SLAs supposed to be?" There are no answers, really. So then the slop has to be analyzed, almost reverse-engineered, and the execs get pissed because nobody knows the basic answers.
Even worse when asked "who will support it?" the answer is "well you will!" except that again, nobody knows how it works, and nobody wants to spend the time (read money) to figure it out. There's nearly never any documentation, and what documentation does exist is also slop and may or may not actually reflect the thing that was vibe coded.
So... yeah, the "AI" crash is going to, at some point, get very expensive on those who capitalized on the vibe coding trend, and very lucrative for people willing to clean up others shit. Vibe janitors, if you will.
Re: (Score:2)
>> "what are the requirements? how does it work? what are the dependencies?
In my experience the AI assistants can easily generate all the documentation you want from any existing code, complete with architecture diagrams. They can create all the tests too, they excel at any kind of boilerplate code like that.
>> There's nearly never any documentation
There will be if you ask for it.
Re: (Score:1)
Can you ask it to produce documentation and diagrams and tests? Yes, you can.
Will they actually be useful? Probably not.
Re: (Score:2)
They can create all the tests too, they excel at any kind of boilerplate code like that.
Tests are not boilerplate. If your tests are boilerplate, you've probably wasted your time.
Re: (Score:2)
>> Tests are not boilerplate
Yeah they are. Every function and endpoint has a signature, and AI can analyze that in a couple of minutes and generate tests for them.
You are welcome to do it manually if you prefer, but I've got better things to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Tests are not boilerplate. If your tests are boilerplate, you've probably wasted your time.
Re: (Score:2)
The AI uses testing frameworks that are commonplace in the code environments I work with, so my tests look just like any other tests you might see elsewhere. In that sense it is boilerplate, and they get generated in just a few minutes.
But you are welcome to waste your time writing your own tests by hand, I sure don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I get as much coverage as I ask for. You seem awfully concerned about this.
Re: (Score:2)
As a code quality aficionado, I have been vibe coding A LOT lately to improve all of what you mentioned.
My vibe code is clear, well documented, built entirely on TDD, and what the AI is fed are clear, reviewed requirements documents.
You are accusing vibe coding by poor engineers of producing poor results. But, you're not praising vibe coding by quality engineers for producing quality results.
LLMs are just new programming languages. And just like how I used to review hundreds or even thousands of
Re: (Score:2)
The trick is to deliver a load of AI slop ahead of the deadline and under budget, and then leave with only the great "success" on your CV. Let someone else deal with the fallout.
It's how C levels have been doing it for years. Gut the company, slash costs, call it a turnaround, and then move on before the company collapses.
Re: (Score:3)
Spending 25 years at the same company isn't good for an IT career.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
>> Spending 25 years at the same company isn't good for an IT career.
He's "a senior software quality-assurance engineer", probably an expert specialist at testing Adobe software. Unfortunately for him the AI's are great at writing test suites these days, his specialty is obsolete.
Re:Poor James (Score:4)
Re: (Score:1)
"And why is spending 25 years in the same place considered bad."
Because IT is about knowledge and despite all the shitty hiring practices it isn't about the tech stack you know but about the variety of DIFFERENT technologies you've absorbed and torn apart. If you've been at the same place for 25yrs then you learned in the first five and spent the last 20 in your comfort zone.
But as someone with 20yrs of varied and progressive enterprise experience avging 5+yrs in position I can assure you that won't get you
Re: (Score:1)
Depends on whether it is an IT career or a development gig [though now they are refusing to hire anyone but developers for IT roles]. Development gigs are pretty much all the same.
Re: (Score:2)
James Strawn, who was laid off from Adobe over the summer after 25 years as a senior software quality-assurance engineer.
I can only assume that for the past decade, James has been ignored, or terrible at his job. Every Adobe product has gotten progressively worse to use, forums are filled with bug reports that get ignored release after release, and the increase in system requirements do not reflect improvements in functionality.
Whether because Adobe didn't like what he had to say, or they decided not to listen to him, it's completely unsurprising that he lost his job.
The folks offering $500K/year for AI experts aren't going to take anyone who makes the claim on a resume, they're almost guaranteed to be looking to poach someone at OpenAI or Google. Practically speaking, they're looking to benefit from the experience that those companies paid for...and James doesn't have it.
On the upswing, odds are pretty good that James will have a job in short order, helping to deal with the fallout of 'vibe coders' who don't know how to do real-world testing. He's probably going to run into some combination of age discrimination and salary discrimination (no way he's working for $60K if he has 25 years at Adobe), but once the messes start being too big to ignore, I'm pretty sure he'll be able to become a project manager that helps direct fixes for deployed code that didn't get actual-QA. The need is most definitely there, it'll just take a bit more time to prove to the brass that he's more valuable to the company than the MBAs that are looking at their now-spherical product for more corners to cut.
It is easy enough to be good at your job, while corporate ignores you and lets the product go down hill. Regardless, staying with a company that is heading down hill like Adobe does make those of us who have watched this decline question his sanity, or decision of paycheck over pride in his job.
I really hope you are right that companies will come around to the realization that using AI output is not the same as QA reviewed output. I'm concerned their answer will be that integrating QA is just a Generative
Re: (Score:2)
Actually he might...
Once you hit 35 raises are harder and harder to get as companies are well aware that the older you get the more risky for you is to change the job...
1% personality type (Score:2)
How many of these articles will we see where a work 100 or more hours a week 1% personality type is lamenting about not finding people willing to work 24x7 and have no time and wreck their health?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect he was ignored. Adobe hasn't just made buggier products, they've also just made worse products, where nobody with any design sense or empathy for a user would allow it to be released. They've always been terrible, but their products are nearly intolerable now. They have the best tech and the worst everything else.
SpamGPT (Score:4, Insightful)
I bet most the AI hiring is spam/scam co's looking to automate and customize spam. Unlike real work, the "AI slop factor" isn't a show-stopper in Spamville.
Re: (Score:1)
Muslims are doing your mom WHILE eating your dog, white people are not coordinated like that. Shuddup maga!
If they cannot find them then train them (Score:5, Insightful)
A company cannot always expect to poach someone fully trained from another company - especially when the skill is a new one. Training is an investment that will pay off -- depending on how much of a bubble AI turns out to be.
Expecting someone to work 7 days/week is stupid - a good way of causing burn out. The staff may physically be there 7 days/week but where will their minds be ?
Re: (Score:2)
Training your employees may help your company in the long run, but training costs money, which will impact your quarterly profits. Executives have famously short attention spans. And the AI hype bubble has your shareholders insisting on immediate implementation. What do?
Re:If they cannot find them then train them (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If they cannot find them then train them (Score:5, Insightful)
When you real job is to prop up stock prices, being on Twitter and giving interviews is working.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? You really think the people who control stock prices are spending their time reading Musk on Twitter?
Re: (Score:2)
(And by "people who control stock prices" I don't mean shadowy secret overlords ... I mean traders.)
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, stock prices go up and down for almost all companies when CEOs or other high-ups do smart or stupid things on the internet. That includes Musk and his various companies. There's even peer reviewed research [atlantis-press.com] on the subject, though obviously, masturbating furiously over how much one hates Musk is far more important to some than facts.
Re: (Score:2)
Hm. That salute he gave in front of an audience seems to have had the opposite effect of propping up stock prices. Perhaps his boss should have a chat with him? Oh, right. You mean he does whatever he wants while he expects everyone else to do what he wants. In that kind of environment, I could work 7 days a week too.
Re: (Score:2)
At least when they try to recruit the most accomplished people in their field, they're being up front about it being a shit job nobody would take if they weren't literally in danger of starving to death.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I just see that it's not about being trainable - it's being controllable.
A lot of people with experience has learned to detect the corporate bullshit and also see what projects that are feasible or not. The AI companies fears that.
A lot of AI companies are just fronts to grab investor money and leave.
At one time around the turn of the century I was involved in a project called Astrolink [wikipedia.org]. I did see early that this was one of those bubble projects with grand visions but without feasibility. The intention was
Re: If they cannot find them then train them (Score:2)
After two decades of bidding wars and job hopping, managers have realized that training your employees just benefits the next company (competitor). So everyone resorts to paying top $$$ for talent that exactly matches the current need. Full-time employment has turned into a chain of 6mo contracts.
It will take another decade or so with no career mobility to get back to long-term employment with training, if things don't get completely offshored.
Re: (Score:2)
If they're willing to pay $500k base for the position, chances are good the company doesn't have anyone on staff who can already do the work.
These unknown startups are looking to find a unicorn who can fulfill the mythical AI dreams the founders have.
Context required. (Score:5, Interesting)
Tech companies are struggling to fill AI-specialized roles despite a surplus of available tech talent.
This isn't very accurate because it makes it seem like the problem is somehow unsolvable.
Despite struggling to fill AI-specialized roles and a surplus of available tech talent, tech companies refuse to train workers to fill desired roles.
This is accurate because it shows both the problem and the response to the problem.
Context is king.
Re: (Score:2)
It is kind of a circular problem though. If you have not got the talent because the domain is new to you; how do your train up talent in the area? Who is going to do this training?
Right now 'high end' AI/ML in the commercial space is rather leading the academic space. So there probably is a very real issue finding a pool of people with 'enough background' to figure out, if you are really trying to do something that is actually avaunt guard.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have not got the talent because the domain is new to you; how do your train up talent in the area?
You pay someone to get the education you need them to have.
Who is going to do this training?
The professors at the college or university that you pay your worker to learn at.
Right now 'high end' AI/ML in the commercial space is rather leading the academic space. So there probably is a very real issue finding a pool of people with 'enough background' to figure out, if you are really trying to do something that is actually avaunt guard.
That only means they need to have workers educated in that academic field with a specialized focus.
If this isn't a good enough solution then companies don't actually need the workers that they claim they need.
Re: (Score:2)
Though I suspect the real issue here is, "we want more H1-B visas".
Advice to hiring managers (Score:5, Insightful)
!) If you want to hire the best find someone with minimal experience and the capability to learn more. DO NOT LOOK FOR THE GUY THAT ALREADY KNOWS HOW TO DO THE JOB. That guy is not leaving his job unless you pay him double what he is worth - because he likes the current people he works with and you are an unknown.
2) If you want to hire people for more than $200,000, you better offer more than just a salary. Once you hit $200k, you are in the top 6% of the USA salary range. At that point you want more free time to enjoy the money, not more money. Expecting people to work 7 days a week because you double their salary is stupid. No one smart enough to make $400k is willing to do that. Quality of life is not just salary, and after $100k people actually care about it. By $200k it becomes the major concern.
3) Age is not a bad thing. Yes it often means their skills are not the most current - but those 25 year olds that have current skills learned them in 1 month. Those old guys and gals can do the same, as long as you offer a real job.
Re: (Score:1)
Not in this job market. If you havent done the exact job already theyre not interested nor have to be...
Old world used to be exactly as you wrote (and is best), new world is "You havent done everything listed on my JD, eh next candidate"
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Being old, I don't browse job postings much (Score:2)
But perhaps they shouldn't be asking for a minimum number of years experience that's longer than LLMs have been around...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
The fur industry is struggling because nobody wants to do the job of clubbing seals. Even with big pay offers, they can’t find enough people willing to swing the clubs.
willing to work seven days a week?? tech needs uni (Score:1)
willing to work seven days a week?? tech needs unions
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, tech needs sanity. No actual professional will work 7 days a week, because it decreased (!) productivity and ruins your health.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, tech needs sanity. No actual professional will work 7 days a week, because it decreased (!) productivity and ruins your health.
That's OK though. The stellar American Healthcare System will fix 'em right up!
Re: (Score:2)
Why not both?
Re: (Score:2)
How do you mean?
Re: (Score:2)
Tech needs sanity AND unions.
Re: (Score:1)
The correct headline should be: (Score:2)
Companies refuse, time and time again, to train employees in the skills they value, and shift blame back on employees.
Bring back personel depts (Score:5, Insightful)
They can't find them? That's because they shifted personel departments, run by the company, staffed by people who have a clue what the company does, and who can talk to the hiring manager to understand what they want, to HR. HR's purpose is not hire, shift, or promote, but only to do meaningless paperwork.
Then they outsourced it, to people who have no idea what the company does, and have no idea what the hiring manager needs, so they make up requirements (like the ass ad I saw that wanted five years with python, when python had only been release three years before.
Re: (Score:2)
You nailed it. Today the first person you talk with his HR and they don't have a clue about the technical questions they ask or the nuances to any answers. In the old days the engineers talked with people first and could tell in a few minutes if someone was full of shit.
Re: (Score:3)
They can't find them? That's because they shifted personel departments, run by the company, staffed by people who have a clue what the company does, and who can talk to the hiring manager to understand what they want, to HR. HR's purpose is not hire, shift, or promote, but only to do meaningless paperwork.
Not quite. HR's job is to protect the company from the evil, mean-spirited, asshole employees. I've literally had that spelled out to me by HR folks in exactly those words. The joys of moving to management. I made the mistake of asking why HR always seems so hostile to the employees and I got an answer.
Then they outsourced it, to people who have no idea what the company does, and have no idea what the hiring manager needs, so they make up requirements (like the ass ad I saw that wanted five years with python, when python had only been release three years before.
Combine the idiotic requirements with the complete lack of reasonable pay and gee, I wonder why they can't find anyone to fill positions?
Re: (Score:2)
>> The joys of moving to management.
You learn a lot of interesting things when you move to management. It's an entirely different plane of existence from an ordinary worker bee.
Re: (Score:2)
>> The joys of moving to management.
You learn a lot of interesting things when you move to management. It's an entirely different plane of existence from an ordinary worker bee.
The first step in isn't that different. You just get a little peak behind the curtain. None of the benefits, but most of the guilt.
Reality disconnect (Score:5, Insightful)
Daniel Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week.
The problem is right in front of them and they still don't understand. They claim to make Artificial Intelligence yet they lack Natural Intelligence.
Re:Reality disconnect (Score:4, Insightful)
How stupid, incompetent and uneducated can you be? People working 7/8 or more in a mental job produce much, much less than those working sane hours. The well established peak performance is at 32h/week for mental work at 6 hours a day. Anybody that does not know that is simply uninformed and clueless. I mean, these results are over 100 years old and they are utterly solid. Yes, you can stretch that 5/8 by doing 2 hours of very light work per day, but that is it. And nobody is except, even if many people mistakenly believe they are.
Re:No job? move to Venezuela (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Authoritarianism is bad for the people (and thus the economy), whether it is left- or right-wing.
Which people and which economy? Their are a number of people who have been doing VERY well over the past 70 years. The economy was growing at absurd rates and people have been gathering absurd amounts of wealth... but that group of people appears to be getting smaller and smaller while their wealth is growing larger and larger... all thanks to Authoritarianism.
"Talent" does not mean what you think it does (Score:3)
People with actual talent do not become LLM "experts" because they realize it is not a career with a future.
Re: (Score:1)
This.
Last I read, the US produces ~1000 PhDs in economics every year. An econ Phd usually requires a year or more of PhD level mathematical statistics and econometrics coursework that could be easily adapted to ML problems. Probably something similar with physics. But having taken that math stats sequence 40 years ago and then, out of curiosity, sitting through Geoffrey Hinton's and Andrew Ng's ML classes on Coursera a couple of years ago, I came away convinced that I should stay away from ML. Mostly becaus
Re: (Score:2)
I find it highly interesting that you, with an economics PhD, have come to pretty much the same conclusions about the limitations of this tech as I do, with a CS PhD.
While I have a different background (CS with IT security specialization and engineering PhD in the field, but almost no statistics), I decided to stay away from AI and ML back when I selected the area to do my PhD in. I realized back then that the AI field is very prone to massively over-promise and under-deliver.
The reality is, that without AG
Can they define what they want? (Score:2)
Kinda of like this [x.com].
Tech specialization (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a joke. Anyone with good fundamentals can pick up a wide variety of tech skills while on the job.
If you don't have an AI department at your company? Find the smartest person you can, and hire them. Give them the task to figure the rest out. Promote them to director or principal engineer (their choice) when your team is humming along.
Easier said than done. But sorry to break it to you, not every part of the job of being HR or C-suite is going to be easy. At least you don't have to be an engineer that builds a team from scratch while under incompetent management that couldn't figure it out on their own.
Re: (Score:2)
>> can pick up a wide variety of tech skills while on the job
But you have to pick up this arcane knowhow from somebody who already knows it, and there may not be anyone there who does know the tech or is willing to spend time teaching it to you. From the corporate perspective we want someone right now who already knows it and can build the product we want in as little time as possible. We will spend crazy money to pare that time to a minimum and get our product on the market first with superior featur
Re: (Score:2)
But you have to pick up this arcane knowhow from somebody who already knows it,
Sounds like a job for a doctorate working at a University.
If it's truly arcane and undiscoverable by us little people working in the corporate world. But most things are not that arcane. And much of the research is published and accessible. I guess if I ask my employer ACM and IEEE membership, they should think twice about saying "no"
it might work if we had time.
you have time.
In this case we want the smartest person who already has the relevant skills and experience, and can hit the ground running.
6-18 months to find that unicorn. And they'll be a bidding war to hire them.
Or you could hire someone now and have them work on it and train up additional staff d
Re: (Score:2)
Have you looked at some of the published literature on AI development? It's pretty deep. Your typical developer with website and CRUD/SQL skills isn't going to know anything about it no matter how smart they are. It would take a long time to get up to speed.
>> 6-18 months to find that unicorn. And they'll be a bidding war to hire them.
Here's the thinking as I see it;
There seems to be an awful lot of $billions sloshing around in the AI sector and I'd like to have a few. I'll convince my investors that
Ultra short term thinking (Score:2)
"hundreds of people worldwide possess the skills to train complex AI models"
Translated into reality, this means that hundreds can be dropped in and produce useful work immediately.
There are thousands more who are highly talented and capable of producing excellent work with a bit of a learning period.
The ringleaders in the AI frenzy seem to have no concept of long term planning. It's all about ultra short term results.
Re: (Score:2)
>> It's all about ultra short term results
It is indeed, and a huge amount of future dominance and money is in the balance. It is a race. They can't wait for you to train up enough to become productive in 6 months.
20 years of experience required (Score:2)
In a field that's been here for two.
2034 (Score:2)
What kind of an idiot thinks they can predict what will happen in the year 2034?
Re: 2034 (Score:4, Funny)
Pretty much every individual with a "C" in front of their job title.
I don't believe this (Score:2)
"Tech companies are struggling to fill AI-specialized roles despite a surplus of available tech talent. U.S. colleges more than doubled the number of computer science degrees awarded between 2013 and 2022. Major layoffs at Google, Meta, and Amazon flooded the job market. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts businesses will employ 6% fewer computer programmers in 2034 than last year. The disconnect stems from companies seeking workers with specific AI expertise."
I don't believe this. Computer programmers
Cherry-picking high salaries (Score:2)
His company advertises base salaries up to $490,000 for a director of machine learning. Daniel Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week
First of all, these salaries are not representative of what is offered to this "sea of talent." Real salaries are much lower.
Second, 7 days a week? This guy deserves to have a hard time finding people, if that's his requirement.
Excuses are BS (Score:1)
I've been trying to talk with this company for a long time, Chainguard, they have a job posted which I'm well qualified for. Their ATS rejected me with an email that they were going with another candidate, 2 months later, job is still posted. I emailed the recruiter at Chainguard multiple times, paid for Linkedin Premium to message them and zero responses. I'm sure they're just collecting resumes and selling resume information to third parties at this point. We need some more laws to make companies transpar
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen the same pattern myself with many companies, it's just a common ghost job, and that company is just one offender among many. I agree legislation is needed to crack down on ghost job postings.
Why companies struggle to find developers (Score:3)
This is simple.
They want...
- Years of experience
- Great credentials
- Low salary
- Poor treatment at work
The high salaries in the summary are charry-picked, these are not normal. Most companies are trying to find senior developers for 100K, and that's not realistic. You get what you pay for.
...for low pay. (Score:2)
we can't find anyone with the required experience at the pay rate we want, so we need to hire my friends from india for 1/2 of what we would pay an american. damn this skilled worker shortage. amazing how india has so much talent yet their own country looks like a garbage dump.
Re: (Score:2)
Such low pay, $490,000 and $500,000
Literal Intellectual Property Theft (Score:2)
Perhaps people just don't want to work in AI-specialised roles. Perhaps they realise that you'd just be fighting an impossible, exhausting uphill battle with AI crap all day and all you'll get in return is being laid off once the company steals all your wisdom and experience and codifies it into their digital copy of your brain. Because that's what it is. That's why they need "top talent" so that they can effectively copy those individuals' knowledge and claim the right to use others' skills for their own g
Seven days a week? (Score:3)
Daniel Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week
Why? Instead of 500K to work 7 days, they can definitely hire at 300K and work 5 days. Costs only $100K more but got much much more work done.
on the one hand (Score:2)
"Park's startup Pickle offers up to $500,000 base salary and expects candidates willing to work seven days a week"
Fuck you, Mr Park.
Wait, on the other hand, I could retire in a few years. Naw fuck that guy and his Pickle.
Although it would be funny to say "PACKLE!" to people who ask where I work now.
The AI stuff, whether that means ML or integrating stuff with LLMs is not all that hard. Working for companies who expect you to develop AGI for them by working 24/7 on the problem is the hard part. Anyone who pr
Enshitification of Recruiting (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Checklist hiring is about as useful as checklist medicine. Yes, you find some things with checklists; however, there is no positive verification that what was found is true. That takes something more than a checklist and no brain.
Job security? (Score:3)
Maybe people want to work somewhere that isn't a random startup in an immature industry, where most of them won't exist in 6 months time.
As soon as these startups fail a round of funding, they're gone. If they're "successful" they get bought out and all the employees either get fired, or have to sign new contracts. Goodbye $500k salary, I hope you had a large stock option.
Paradox of Choice + Tragedy of the Commons (Score:2)
in other news... (Score:2)
In other news, in a sea of males, women can't find the husband they want.
Re: (Score:2)
My thoughts exactly!
Fire the 55-year-olds, bring in H1-B visas to train AI to replace them.
Similar to what they were doing - having older users train their H1-B replacements, but now the older employees won't have to train their replacements. Their replacements will train their own AI replacements. Yay.