[dusted]

I think I've read a few posts on this type on HN, and it seems to me like they are similar in a few ways, there might not be anything wrong with that, but I am still somewhat inclined to believe these things are why the job hunt is not going well for them.

Almost always asking for "meaningful" jobs. What even is that? I'll challenge the notion and call it "An inability to find meaning in the available work."

Feeling attacked about their profile, but not changing them to accommodate.

Supposedly seniors relying on recruiters and job offers instead of using their network, if they've worked with people in the past, and can't draw on that, I wonder how that is, is it that everybody they worked with are not nice people and don't like them ?

Sense of entitlement, _YOU_ liking the hiring manager? It's your job to get the hiring manager to like you, not the other way around.

Sense of pride, interview went well, got offer, got ghosted ? Well, what did you do to fix it? I'd have walked into office, hardcopy of offer in hand and told the first person I meet: "Hi, I got this offer, I'm glad to accept! Who can I talk to ?"

Not knowing your place: You were supposedly not hired into some leadership position to change the world from day 1, you have opinions, they are based on previous experiences, made elsewhere. Shut up, listen, learn, observe and do your best to do what they ask of you, at least the first half year or more, and then start gently providing input and resistance, show that you can do it their way before trying to get them to do it yours.

You don't sound unlucky, you sound hard to get along with to be rudely honest.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

I disagree with this. You sound like a manager I'd never want to work for because you seem to believe this relationship is all about you and I'm some kind of servant.

> Almost always asking for "meaningful" jobs. What even is that?

A lot of people like to feel like they're contributing positively to the world. If you can't explain how their job does that then maybe your company isn't a positive in the world.

> Sense of entitlement, _YOU_ liking the hiring manager? It's your job to get the hiring manager to like you, not the other way around.

It's a two-way street. Why would I want to work for a jackass? That's a recipe for unhappiness. I want a manager I can work with, not one I have to suck it up and work for.

> Not knowing your place: You were supposedly not hired into some leadership position to change the world from day 1, you have opinions, they are based on previous experiences, made elsewhere. Shut up, listen, learn, observe and do your best to do what they ask of you, at least the first half year or more, and then start gently providing input and resistance, show that you can do it their way before trying to get them to do it yours.

Ok, this at least is decent advice even if I don't care for the 'know your place' framing.

[dusted]

I'm a swdev who knows this relationship is all about my company wanting to make a profit off of me, and me wanting to earn money by providing my company with the service that they need in order to do that. Yes, that includes pushing back and resisting stupidity, but it does not consist entirely of me getting my way in every little detail because I'm oh-so uniquely blessed with the magic and rare ability to program a computer.

I'm totally not buying into the silicon valley "we're changing the world!!1one" hype, get real, we sit in comfy offices, playing with computers all day.

You're not working for the hiring manager, don't screw it up before you've at least come inside to have a look around, and have had a shot at making a nice environment for yourself in your position, which won't happen when you get offended so easily.

Places change around with experience, respect is something you earn, and you start from scratch every time, even within new teams in the same corp.

[Sohcahtoa82]

> I'm totally not buying into the silicon valley "we're changing the world!!1one" hype

I always loved how the show Silicon Valley poked fun at that. Pretty sure the words "making the world a better place" were sprinkled around many places.

Most companies exist for a single purpose: Profit. Sure, maybe some start as "Hey, this would be a cool thing to have", but eventually the focus is switched to extracting as much money from the population as possible.

I know a guy who is obsessed with this idea of finding fulfilling work. He's an artist who has despised every job he's had because he expects fulfillment, like his job should give him heart-felt purpose. He actually had a job once where he got to use his artistic skills, but he hated it because it didn't allow him to draw the things he wanted.

I'm just like...you're not going to find a job drawing fan art of video game characters. -_- Get over it.

You don't expect any job to provide meaningful, fulfilling, satisfying work. It's all done so someone can profit. Find a non-profit organization that helps the poor if you want fulfilling work.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

> Yes, that includes pushing back and resisting stupidity, but it does not consist entirely of me getting my way in every little detail because I'm oh-so uniquely blessed with the magic and rare ability to program a computer.

Ok, that I can agree with. I think I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't push back on ideas I thought were bad, but at the end of the day it is my manager's responsibility so it is their decision.

[arenaninja]

Not OP but there's one point of yours I take issue with:

> Supposedly seniors relying on recruiters and job offers instead of using their network, if they've worked with people in the past, and can't draw on that, I wonder how that is, is it that everybody they worked with are not nice people and don't like them ?

I'm good at my job, senior and even led teams (tech lead) a couple of times at large public companies by now and when changing jobs I couldn't use my network. I don't live in a tech hub (also sounds like OP's situation) and most of my former coworkers/managers lack ambition/drive to get to companies/teams I aim to get hired at. The reason being that most of the companies I worked for were not tech and this is a severe handicap - to put it in perspective I make almost twice what my manager made 5 years ago

[dusted]

A thoughtful reply, thank you.

I'm not talking about necessarily getting a dream job, or even a good job through your network, especially if you're aiming high, but then rules are different then, you can't both be "perpetually rained-upon unlucky never getting a break unlucky dev" and be "well, I could get _THOSE_ jobs, but I'm so unlucky because I can't land absolute top-tier ones even though I definitely feel like I deserve it." at the same time.

[nordicengineer]

Would you say this math is reasonable?

- 3 companies/year (3y on average at a company) - 2 teams/company (1.5y on average in a team) - max 10 members/team - add a 5x factor meaning you will BOND!!! (closely enough to dream of working again with you) with 50 other people outside of your team, which is crazy if you ask me, but I'm playing along

3x2x60 = 360 people. That's your entire network in 10 years, pure acquaintances, not people that you bonded with.

My humble view is that maybe you bond with 2 team members and maybe another 5 people outside of the team. 3x2x7 = 42 people. Which is actually not far from Dunbar's number of 50 friends and 150 meaningful contacts.

42. That's how many people would actually vouch for you within a 10 year period.

My network is not my problem. Everyone is wonderful and supportive. But you know very well that recommending someone isn't everything. You make it sound like if someone recommends you, then you shortcircuit the interview process and the stars align and you should just say thanks for having a job, any job.

[kwertyoowiyop]

You won’t short-circuit the process but you’ll probably get a leg up. A colleague’s recommendation is another piece of data for the folks involved in the hiring process, and maybe it’ll tip the scales.

Your colleague may also let you know of upcoming jobs, or steer you towards a particular job that you’d be a great fit for.

[dusted]

I guess I kinda say that you shouldn't make the interview process about your needs but about theirs, when you've gotten inside and have proven yourself, it's time to change things, but not before.

[sascha_sl]

> Almost always asking for "meaningful" jobs. What even is that? I'll challenge the notion and call it "An inability to find meaning in the available work."

Having an impact. Right now, I'm stuck in a glue code + terraform + maintaining third party code job. 2 years ago I did platform engineering with high impact features for ~100 people across ~20 teams.

> Sense of entitlement, _YOU_ liking the hiring manager? It's your job to get the hiring manager to like you, not the other way around.

Particularly in tech, if you forego extreme salaries, you should pick who you want to work with. You spend more than half of your time awake with these people after all.

> Not knowing your place: You were supposedly not hired into some leadership position to change the world from day 1, you have opinions, they are based on previous experiences, made elsewhere. Shut up, listen, learn, observe and do your best to do what they ask of you, at least the first half year or more, and then start gently providing input and resistance, show that you can do it their way before trying to get them to do it yours.

This is the kicker. You can make things better, but you have to pick your fights, and even with those you need to be careful and have some diplomacy skills to seem helpful rather than a rude know-it-all. Remember, if you call something crap, you're probably doing it close to the person who is responsible for it being crap. They might even know it's not good but were restricted by time. Choose your words carefully.

[samhw]

> Remember, if you call something crap, you're probably doing it close to the person who is responsible for it being crap.

I got bitten by this once. It turns out there's a variable φ(crap) representing the amount of time you have to work at a company before – what I thought were – self-deprecating comments, about the app being a piece of shit, are regarded as self-deprecating, rather than an outsider trashing their work.

> if you forego extreme salaries

Just FWIW, to forego is to go before, whereas to forgo is to go without.

[bjourne]

What you're saying is that the app is crap, everyone knows it is crap, but it's a faux pas for the new person to say it? If so, it seems it is not really about the crappy app but more about the in-group pecking order. Wish adults would be mature enough to forgo things like that.

[samhw]

I think the other person got it spot-on in their reply. It's not about social pecking order - a long-time employee could well be at the bottom of the social pecking order - it's about whether it's perceived to be your own work that you're deprecating, rather than their and not your work. It doesn't matter if it's someone else's too, only that it's yours in part.

This is closely related to the ingroup vs outgroup distinction, but not quite the same: e.g. I could be a former employee, even someone who was disliked or who left in disgrace, and still be under the aegis of the 'us' in this context.

Edit: On reflection, I kinda ignored the rest of your message and got stuck on the answer to your clarifying question. I do totally agree with your point about maturity. I suppose my only caveat is that I was moaning/joking/joking-and-moaning at the time, rather than making a serious point that would have been relevant to our work, so I don't think it was immaturity in a sense that caused any actual problems.

[dusted]

Thing is, context means something to people, a new person coming in starting shitting all over everything has no context for saying that, they may be right, but the don't have any shared experiences of why it is so, and that makes a difference. Having suffered through things together, it makes a difference, it softens the words, or at least, it points them away from people, and into situations, situations of the past, that a newcomer cannot know, and so, cannot be referring to.

[bjourne]

Not having knowledge of the context should work in the new persons favor. They don't know how the app was developed, or what everyone else thinks about it, but can immediately recognize that it is crap and dares to say so. Bravery and honesty are traits to be cherished. And in your example, the app is crap is a true statement. So it still seem to me to be more about in-group/out-group psychology, the workplace's pecking order, and fragile bruised egos than anything else.

[samhw]

Thanks for the explanation! Like I said in my own reply (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29512035), this is spot-on and better than I could have expressed it – and, clearly, than I did express it – myself. It's about whether you're part of the 'we' whose work you're deprecating.

[plutonorm]

He sounds like a person high in creativity trying to get along with standard developers who, by and large, are not creative people.

Creativity is a one of the big 5 character traits and pretty immutable. If you are highly creative you #need# new experiences, it's not just a preference, it's necessary for your psychological well being.

Moving into and working with companies dominated by non creative types, who prefer order and structure and consistency, can be soul destroying. People of this type often find themselves pushing against huge structural resistance to change within organisations and it can seem inexplicable because they fail to appreciate how different others are to them.

It can be quite a revelation to appreciate that other people might actually be adverse to change, rather than energised by it.

Your response is a standard response from someone who isn't high in creativity, who is not particularly open minded. you do not appreciate the #need# for creative expression, just as he does not understand your strong preferences for order and consistency.

Both kinds of personality on this axis of the big 5 are useful to a company in their own ways. Low creativity is useful for maintaining systems, keeping things running in known environments. High creatives are best placed at the frontier of the new, where the land is not yet known.

There is also some merit to the farmer/hunter stereotype imho. Farmers like consistency and routine, hunters are open and distractible and creative.

My recommendation to the OP is to go work in startups. Big companies are usually heavily populated with farmer types low in creativity and high in other traits. The OP needs to go to the edge where he is needed, not in the middle where he is not.

But honestly in my career it has not been easy to find the right positions either and over time I have come to understand the problem as described above. Creatives need to be in a role where new ground is being broken, with freedom to express their creativity. This is not an easy position to find and won't really become available until later in a career. But this isn't unique to the developer career, it's a general problem for high creatives to find a place in a society that wants them to be a cog when they have a deep, powerful, unchangeable and fundamental need to be anything but a cog.

It's a hard challenge, and they should treat it as just that, a challenge requiring a creative solution.

[kwertyoowiyop]

This seems like good advice. Go to a small company (or team) where architecture is being created, not a large one where it’s being maintained.

Of course the other side of this is that you will HAVE to write a lot of code. Just be prepared for that responsibility.

[tempodox]

I don't get why your comment has been downvoted without an explanation. From my (admittedly ignorant) point of view it seems like a fair perspective.

[plutonorm]

The other guy probably took it as an insult that I was saying he wasn't creative. Being 'creative' is seen as 'good' when in fact it's often a huge pita.

[bluesnowmonkey]

You’re calling people uncreative farmers. Of course it’s insulting. But to someone who stays in one place for a long time, not because it feels good but because it’s what the world needs to keep turning, young job hopping engineers remind me of my kids, always wanting new legos.

It’s not about whether you’re a special creative snowflake, it’s about whether you have the disciple and emotional fortitude to keep working on something after the easy parts are done.

[obstacle1]

> after the easy parts are done

"Uncreative farmers" is insulting, and this isn't? The claim that your standard megacorp legacy maintainer is altruistically keeping the world spinning seems a little self-important, too.

[plutonorm]

But it feels good for you to help keep the world spinning, you gain pleasure from being a part of it. That is dedication to tradition and the love of what is. That is a character trait, a part of the character trait that I propose to call the 'farmer' mentality and its part of the low end of openness on the big 5. It is this emotion that I lack and may be a trait of others high in openness/creativity. It is not simply a conceit, it is not selfishness or a lack of a desire to give.

It is the result of not placing value in "what currently is" as a default position. The what 'is' and 'has been' has little value to many. "What we have now is not good. It is not worth my sacrifice.".

And thinking about it rationally there are many ways to justify this position: The world is heading towards ecological disaster. The world is a sickening mess of inequality, from the starving to the over fead. From the free to the stultifying world of North Korea.

Propping up the inner processes of facebook, is not worth my sacrifice. What 'is', is not worthwhile, what is important is what can be made, what can be created to better the lives of others. Continuing to do what we do is inadequate and counterproductive.

And while you may view this as childish and something to be grown out of, I contend this is an enduring personality trait. I also contend that it is a personality trait that has merit, it has utility to society as a whole. Who is it that is going to go out and change things for the better? The personality dynamic of the entrepreneurs and the artists (because they are very similar personalities) is one of dissatisfaction and it has to be, because the discomfort of being on the edge away from the herd has to be less than the discomfort induced by remaining in the herd, otherwise the creative behaviour would not be realised.

What you are saying in your response is simply that your emotional makeup allows you to function in a maintenance role without too much discomfort because while you would prefer more creative aspects to your job, you can find solace in contributing to society. And what I am saying is that there are some for whom their personality makeup does not permit this as a solution. For these people it is better to at least attempt to make something new. They will probably fail, but it is by evolutionary design that a certain proportion of people will be forced to try.

In the end there is value to maintenance and there is value to exploration. Some will be happy with a world dominated by maintenance, some will be mildly unhappy and learn to find value in it. But some will be so adverse to it that they will be forced to perform the role of exploration. All of these kinds of people contribute. I am making no value judgement here, what you hear in my voice is only resentment born of being in the minority.

[dusted]

Except I upvoted it, I am not offended by it, but didn't bother writing out a "defence" for my view, I have no desire to change those assumptions.

I do not consider myself particularly creative, no, if I was "highly creative" people would pay for my paintings and other artworks, as it stand, I'm lucky to even get invited to display them anywhere. I paint abstract acrylics, enjoy photography, program fun little projects and games, sculpt and print 3d models and build other inventions and electronics, pursue research that has no obvious practical application, the normal stuff that able people do, but I don't feel entitled to do so at my job, I work my job so I can afford to have my hobbies.

The vast, vast majority of jobs are, by their very definition, stuff that is hard or un-fun enough that you _HAVE_ to pay someone to do them.. They're the category of human endeavour that are needed (some more than others) and that people ALSO don't want to do anyway.. I'd pay money for the privilege to program _MY_ programs.. People will sing, dance, play music and write stories and pursue all these lovely, meaningful things, not because they are incentivised by money but because they WANT to, HAS to do them. And yes, there's some small fraction that get to find that their life calling coincide with their paid job, but setting the bar at that level, that is setting yourself up for failure and dissapointment.

I know, you're reading this as if I'm saying you should accept shitty jobs you hate, but read my other comments first.. I'm not saying that. I'm saying you should find an acceptable job, and find something to like about it. You need to at least give it a chance before getting offended that it's not everything you so rightly deserve.

OP asked a question, I gave an answer as best I could, it's not the one true answer, but it is my point of view, how I perceive what he has written through the lens of my own experiences and values. It is not a critique of him as a person, but of the way he comes across, and hopefully, he can use that, together with the other comments, to synthesize some kind of model that he can use to better understand his situation.

[plutonorm]

Beautifully written and reasoned. I disagree only in that I think more emphasis should be placed upon finding a niche that allows that range of expression. I also believe that society would be wealthier and happier if more such niches existed. But if you cannot find alignment, "working to live" is a reasonable compromise.

You clearly are creative, although you mock me by claiming that you are not. People who have worked hard to change an aspect of themselves are often especially harsh to those who have trouble with that same aspect.

For instance someone who is distractible may be a messy person by nature. But say they worked really hard and managed to stay neat and tidy by force of will and habit? They can often be more judgemental of untidiness than those to whom it comes naturally. "I have accepted this and overcome it, and it has cost me a lot.... Why have you not put forward the same effort?" Also, when you are confronted with an external image of the thing you have fought against, those emotions get transferred onto the thing. The emotional tone of that internal struggle with disorganisation becomes placed over the external world, over the top of the person who has not yet organised themselves.

And so it is with people who have struggled and sacrificed pieces of themselves to live in the world. When they see that part of themselves in others it can bring out the emotion of that internal struggle, which probably includes a little self loathing.

I think maybe that dynamic influenced the tone of your original message.

As my own dynamics influenced my reply. My anger with this world for being on average different to me led me to write something that had an undercurrent of resentment.

But it is only through the tension of our emotions that we find the will to act in the world. We may not always be the most reasoned beings, but it is this imbalance that gives us agency. It is through my anger and indignation that I act to change the world. To find myself at peace with the world is to find myself impotent, and I still suffer from the delusion that I have something of value to give.

[dusted]

> I think maybe that dynamic influenced the tone of your original message.

I believe you are, at least in part, right in that. I'm going to reflect on this further, later in the day, but it is a very insightful analysis, thank you.

I do believe this is part of "growing up", learning to not just accept (as defeat) the way things are, but to find something in them to thrive on, even without changing yourself or who you are.

I've been a fierce Free Software advocate, a Linux fanatic, I've stood on my principles any chance I got, and it's been necessary for me to do so, and I understand that other people have other things about themselves that limit them in one way or another, but it really is important, not for the world, but for the individual, to be able to find some way to live in the world that is not entirely without compromise or adjustment (whichever fit the situation).

Again, I'm not advocating for compromise, or for changing who you are, but to seek reasons that things can work out, instead of seeking for reasons they can't. I just cannot muster sympathy for this particular concept of "feeling entitled and not having a job" at the same time.. It's like some famous chef, who used to work at a 3 star michelin restaurant and goes to bed each night hungry because he's absolutely refusing to work at the "not even 1 star" high-end restaurant, while lots of other people are able to function just fine in their job at McDonalds, it's a display of privilege that I don't care for or respect.

[pseudalopex]

Creativity isn't a Big 5 trait.

[plutonorm]

You can substitute the word openness for creativity in my post, it doesn't really change the argument. The words are made up anyway, they did a factor analysis over lots of questionnaire responses and then found the largest contributing factors. Then they kind of eyeball the questions and tried to come up with a word that described the kinds of questions in that cluster. Openness is prob more accurate, but creativity is more readily understood and close enough to be used when trying to convey a message imo.

[pseudalopex]

I know how the Big 5 model was developed. Creativity is more complex than just openness. Needing new experiences everywhere is novelty seeking. It's more complex than openness too. And openness distributions for software developers and everyone else are about the same as far as I know.

Creative people can thrive in many companies. You're right startups tend to be good for novelty seekers.

[plutonorm]

Your condescending tone tells me that you are likely just the sort of person the OP is having trouble with. And they are everywhere in software development.

[gerbilly]

He's probably just thinking of openness to experience."

[dangerface]

> Almost always asking for "meaningful" jobs. What even is that?

There are lots of companies that are always "looking to higher" but they aren't actively highering, bullshit "job opportunities" are everywhere.

> Feeling attacked about their profile, but not changing them to accommodate.

Their profile should be an honest description of their abilities. Suggesting they change to "accommodate" sounds like you are suggesting they just bullshit to get the job like every one else?

> Supposedly seniors relying on recruiters and job offers

Unless your friends are recruiters they are probably too busy with their own work to find you a job. Looking for job offers and recruiters are two very well proven strategies to get a job, implying otherwise is odd.

> It's your job to get the hiring manager to like you, not the other way around.

Again sounds like your advice is just talk bullshit to get a job you have no real interest in. Bad advice.

To be rudely honest you come across as a bullshitter with no useful advice.

[dusted]

> There are lots of companies..

You can find meaning in anything if you look at it the right way, even if you're writing soulless fintech code to steal from the poor, there are probably interesting challenges in there.. How facebook manages to infer so much about their users based on the data they're stealing? Interesting problems even if they're distasteful.

> Their profile should be an honest description ...

They most certainly should ,what I mean by accommodate is not to bullshit, but to gain actual experience with [keyword] if that's really something that's a problem (I've NEVER encountered anyone saying that I miss [keyword], if asked about [keyword] I will answer honestly, ranging from 'heard of, not touching' through 'know well, not touching again' to 'no idea, can probably learn'.

> Unless your friends are recruiters they are probably too busy with their own work to find you a job...

Usually you can get a job by asking a friend to put in a word for you at their place, or just letting them know you're looking.

> Again sounds like your advice is just talk bullshit..

Making someone like in as socially-shallow a situation as a job-interview _IS_ bullshitting, it's called social norms, it's being polite and pleasant and well dressed and whatever else is typically expected. I'm not suggesting they lie or mislead, if they're genuinely an unlikable person and feel like they want to be, well, sorry, but that's probably a contributing factor to not getting a job.

> To be rudely honest you come across as a bullshitter with no useful advice.

I'm perfectly okay with that, it'd be rather a boring thread if every perspective was exactly the same, but OP feels like a typical overly spoiled primadonna to me. It's probably because I come from a somewhat less privileged background, having seen what cards other people are dealt, it seems incredibly bratty to come on HN, whining not that you can't find _ANY_JOB_AT_ALL_NOMATTER_WHAT_ but that you can't land your absolute dream job because you're basically intolerably picky and absolutely unable to adapt yourself. I'm sure OP has a lot of potential, but they seem to be so hard-set in their ways, wanting everything to be just-so in order to even give it a chance, that they cheat themselves out of it.

[dangerface]

I have a network that gets me work, they get me more work than I have time to do, this is why any serious developer needs to qualify work and turn down stuff they don't have the time for. Despite my network bring in more work than I can do I still look for more qualified work as my skills are highly valued I can find better paying work than what comes to me.

You'r advice is to depend only on your network? No serious developer with a network would do this.

You don't feel you can turn down jobs, in 2021? You have an abundance of work from your network but can't afford to turn down the shit jobs in place for higher paying jobs? I don't think so.

Your advice is laughable any senior would recognise you don't do what you say, you wouldn't follow your own advice. I think you are just trying to front on some one with no job to make yourself feel successful.

Your advice boils down to "If I was you people would just bring me work, LOL get gud" as advice this is obviously useless and arrogant the real point behind it is to make yourself feel better about your position as you put it "a somewhat less privileged background" you think you are the only one who has overcome adversity? I don't think you have faced real adversity. Your attitude of just be successful and people will bring you work is all the proof I need that you have not done a days work in your life.

[dusted]

> Your advice is to depend only on your network?

No, but read OP again, I'm replying to someone who tells they cannot get a job, that consider themselves unlucky, I have to assume they'd be willing to actually take a job, but they somehow manage to get themselves out of it.

> You don't feel you can turn down jobs, in 2021?

You can turn down all the jobs in the world when you're in a position to do so. Beggars can't be choosers, and when I'm reading OP, I'm seeing a privileged beggar, someone who feels they deserve better than they can manage to get.

> Your advice is laughable any senior would recognise you don't do what you say..

As you say yourself, if he has no job, he is not in a position to turn any job down. "Oh! But I was a senior in my previous job! I'm way too fancy to be a senior in this, slightly worse job!" -> "Well, no worries there mate, you're not getting it!" If I found myself out of a job, I'd get a new job, _ANY_ new job, preferrably one as a developer, sure, I can't have junior in my title, but I can easily enough go back to being "just" a developer, and work my way up from there, or keep looking for a new job, but I'd no longer be in a position of no job or unlucky.

> Your advice boils down to "If I was you people would just bring me work, LOL get gud" as advice

No idea how you get that from anything I write, is it because I hinted at OP maybe _feeling_ better than he could prove to be during an interview (as far as I read, he never got far enough into a position to actually prove himself?) then again, others have declared me lacking in creativity, maybe that's why I can't see where you get that idea from :-)

My attitude is not to be just successful, it's to do your best and be grateful for what you can get, instead of demanding the world right from the bat.

[dangerface]

Some one looking for work feels down on their luck and your advice is to stop looking for work and just get your mates to find you a job and leech off the reputation they have made.

Thats shitty advice, advice you admit wouldn't work for you but think is good enough for others.

[nordicengineer]

> Usually you can get a job by asking a friend to put in a word for you at their place, or just letting them know you're looking.

tl;dr

[dusted]

But seriously man, take a job, don't make demands, accept a non-senior position, go back to doing your thing, which I assume is developing, after you've been there long enough to show them that you got the stuff, tactfully negotiate new position and salary when you've done that, is well liked and trusted and the opportunity (yearly salary negotiation or whatnot) comes around.

[mvc]

> Supposedly seniors relying on recruiters and job offers instead of using their network, if they've worked with people in the past, and can't draw on that, I wonder how that is, is it that everybody they worked with are not nice people and don't like them ?

Half my network of previous managers has joined facebook/meta :-(

[pbalau]

Most of them have other friends, some of whom might be founders and looking to hire.

[foogazi]

Exactly- that should be a huge networking accelerator

Go out for lunch / coffee / beer

Or come to HN and compain

[codeddesign]

Agreed. If people aren’t chasing after you then you have done something wrong along the way. Learn and adapt. Ask yourself “what did I not convince them of that they didn’t hire me on the spot?”

[foogazi]

> Supposedly seniors relying on recruiters and job offers instead of using their network

This always stands out to me

I’ve had 6 jobs since college: only #5 was outside my network (which I leveraged into #6)