"the hamster wheel of technology change"

[Brian Burress]

Hi Fernando,

Congrats on the book!

Not sure from the table of contents.  Do you offer any guidance for what I will call "the hamster wheel of technology change"?  With so many new frameworks, new languages, new versions of existing X, etc. it is certainly impossible to keep current with everything.  A good skill to have is being able to determine what to learn, when to learn it, and how - all in context of being marketable as well as to actually apply what you learn.

[Tim Cooke]

An observation I've made over the years is that there hasn't been anything fundamentally new in computer science for many decades. New languages, frameworks, technologies and the like are re implementations of well known and understood foundations. The most valuable skill thing I've learned through observation is to understand the foundations of programming with the associated tooling and be able to determine which foundation is built upon by any new shiny tech that comes along.

[Fernando Doglio]

Hi Brian, great question!

I definitely agree with Tim here, and while I don't address the specific problem you bring up here in the book, I do cover the fact that, like Tim says, we're all developers and if you manage to understand the basics, you'll be able to pick up any new and emerging technology quite fast.
After all, it's all code and very few different paradigms, the rest is syntax that can be picked up quite fast.

Brian Burress wrote:Hi Fernando,

Congrats on the book!

Not sure from the table of contents.  Do you offer any guidance for what I will call "the hamster wheel of technology change"?  With so many new frameworks, new languages, new versions of existing X, etc. it is certainly impossible to keep current with everything.  A good skill to have is being able to determine what to learn, when to learn it, and how - all in context of being marketable as well as to actually apply what you learn.

[Tim Holloway]

Fernando Doglio wrote:Hi Brian, great question!

I definitely agree with Tim here, and while I don't address the specific problem you bring up here in the book, I do cover the fact that, like Tim says, we're all developers and if you manage to understand the basics, you'll be able to pick up any new and emerging technology quite fast.
After all, it's all code and very few different paradigms, the rest is syntax that can be picked up quite fast.

Now tell that to HR.

Successful candidate must have
_ 18 years experience with Oracle 12.2.08-fixpack 3 (nothing older or newer)
_ 5 years in Silver Bullet X (created 4½ years ago)
_ knowledge of argle-bargle in a web-based environment
_ 3 years experience in Amazon Cloud wtih Kubernetes using Spring Boot with IBM Websphere
… etc., etc., etc.

No, I don't get hired through HR.  

[Brian Burress]

Tim Holloway wrote:

Fernando Doglio wrote:Hi Brian, great question!

I definitely agree with Tim here, and while I don't address the specific problem you bring up here in the book, I do cover the fact that, like Tim says, we're all developers and if you manage to understand the basics, you'll be able to pick up any new and emerging technology quite fast.
After all, it's all code and very few different paradigms, the rest is syntax that can be picked up quite fast.

Now tell that to HR.

Successful candidate must have
_ 18 years experience with Oracle 12.2.08-fixpack 3 (nothing older or newer)
_ 5 years in Silver Bullet X (created 4½ years ago)
_ knowledge of argle-bargle in a web-based environment
_ 3 years experience in Amazon Cloud wtih Kubernetes using Spring Boot with IBM Websphere
… etc., etc., etc.

No, I don't get hired through HR.  

I'm of the same mindset as Tim C and Fernando in that I tend to think in coding solutions abstractly and then figure out how to apply it within whatever I'm working with.  Not everyone is wired to do it that way.  And yes, I had posting/HR requirements like yours in mind with my question.  I always get a chuckle when the description lists a # of years experience required for something that hasn't been around that many years yet.

[Tim Cooke]

I read job adverts quite differently to the way I'm sure they're intended. To me "an exciting opportunity" means it's absolute chaos" and asking for a "rockstar" means all the projects will fall at your door because nobody else has a clue what they're doing.

Why can't companies advertise for "someone to put in a solid days work mucking in where needed". That's the kind of day I want to have.

[Tim Holloway]

Tim Cooke wrote:
Why can't companies advertise for "someone to put in a solid days work mucking in where needed". That's the kind of day I want to have.

Because they want a "Team Player" who will contribute "110 percent" despite the fact that at any time they may kick you to the curb.

Speaking of "110%", I once had an IBM representative explain to my boss that running the systems continually at 100% meant that the slightest glitch could kick them over into territory where there was no reserve capacity to handle it and the results would be an absolute train wreck.

[Tim Cooke]

Oh yes, team player is a good one. "Works well under pressure" is another one that I read as "your boss is a micromanaging nightmare".

[Tim Holloway]

Tim Cooke wrote:Oh yes, team player is a good one. "Works well under pressure" is another one that I read as "your boss is a micromanaging nightmare".

I tend to read that one as "Expect unrealistic schedules, long hours and no time off". I wouldn't apply to one of those at gunpoint.

[Tim Cooke]

You're thinking of "high paced environment"

[Tim Holloway]

Tim Cooke wrote:You're thinking of "high paced environment"

Alas for the day when Dilbert went into politics. For me, that one meant "We made an expensive commitment, we're behind schedule and the senior VP has a fat bonus riding on this project. And we'll lay off the entire group once it's finished (one way or the other)"