In my experience, the problems given to juniors are often open ended “improve this” or “fix this” type projects, but smaller scope or lower priority things that more senior devs would just never get to.
I will say though, needing to socialize across other teams to understand the problem and drive the correct solution does strike me as more mid/senior level work.
In the Bay Area I’m also easily able to order alcohol on all the big delivery services, but they all seem pretty consistent about scanning your ID for age verification before they drop it off.
I don’t understand. Why would the suppliers change the recipe to _add_ sesame? Is it not just that they accepted the “may contain sesame” label instead of removing (or proving the lack of) sesame?
They aren't saying they unfortunately _have_ fuck-you money, they're saying they unfortunately relate to wanting to have a small social circle and not have to "deal with it" anymore
According to David Wadhwani’s LinkedIn, he was at Adobe from 2002-2015 with his title listed as SVP and GM of the “digital media business unit” before rejoining in 2021 as the Chief Business Officer.
But "relatively affordable in the Bay Area" is still relatively very expensive nationally no?
Maybe the gap is just that the people surveyed overestimated their likelihood of working in a HCOL place (or the sample and/or population in question is legitimately biased toward that)
It's not clear to me why you think "I refuse to do the thing you're asking me to do" is _less_ reasonable than saying "I will only do the thing you're asking me if you pay me $large_amount"
To me, the latter response is perfectly reasonable. There are plenty of tasks that I wouldn't want to do as part of my regular work duties, that I would be happy to do in exchange for the right bonus check.
If a manager is looking for someone to perform the task, and they decided to _fire_ an employee because they said "I'd do it for $X" instead of saying "No I won't do it", I'd say that manager was either on a delusional ego trip or looking for another chump to exploit.
I have a similar approach that works well, you just need one more filtering step.
Anyone who reacts negatively to the salary request, you ignore and move on. Don't even bother replying.
For the "lets hop on a call" folks, I have a second copy-paste that just politely states that my schedule is tight between interviewing and my day job and that I want to ensure a reasonable fit is possible before investing a lot of time.
Anyone who _still_ hasn't given a clear answer after those 2 tries I stop replying to.
To be clear, well north of 90% of inbound linkedin recruiters will fail this test, but I've found it to be a surprisingly low-effort way to separate valid opportunities from uninteresting recruiter spam
AFAICT it's pretty common among tech companies for "recruiting" to be called "talent acquisition" and "human resources" to be called "people operations" or similar
Getting RSUs doesn’t ever “suck”, but getting 70%+ less (denominated in $usd) money in your quarterly vesting than before is unpleasant - even if you knew it was coming at some point and don’t critically depend on that income.
What’s more common - hiring managers who see the inclusion of a GitHub as a small positive signal but don’t scrutinize heavily (or even more likely don’t bother to click into it), or those that dig deep and scrutinize open source contributions as a primary decision factor?
I agree that we could collectively be more mindful about why we're doing things and what we're getting out of them, but this seems like a strange example to emphasize the point.
Do many people claim that they're intrinsically motivated to do their jobs independent of compensation?
My answer to "would you still do the job you do if they no longer gave you money for it?" has been an emphatic NO for every day of my working life and I assumed that was the common perspective.
I think it's possible to recognize that 3rd party recruiters can be good or bad at their job while also coming to the conclusion that the bad outweighs the good to a degree that it's not worth the time to figure it out.
It's certainly a privilege to be in a position where you'd still have an excess of inbound job opportunities even without 3rd party recruiters. But if that's the position you're in, it's one of the more effective strategies I've seen to increase signal:noise.
I will say though, needing to socialize across other teams to understand the problem and drive the correct solution does strike me as more mid/senior level work.