|
|
|
|
|
by aghull
4760 days ago
|
|
I have a lot of problems with this article. > What there is is a shortage of ultra-elite American-born talent, and Silicon Valley wants to hire the very best in the world. The view from Silicon Valley is that a lot of the US talent, while bountiful in number, just doesn't stack up. So you're saying that the US has a shortage of the world's best talent? And that Silicon Valley wants to be able to hire the world's best? Those 2 suppositions seem too obvious to bear mentioning. Are we supposed to expect the majority of the ultra-elite of anything to come out of the US? Then the article looks at average salaries for STEM workers over time to "prove" that there's no shortage based on "the fundamental laws of supply and demand." OK, but average price would only rise if the supply-to-demand ratio was also shrinking, not if it was relatively constant. I don't see this brought up in the article. |
|
Likewise the most talented scientists, engineers, and developers I know are always the ones who have a harder time finding work. Why? Because they can intimidate potential bosses and co-workers without meaning to. Because they're indifferent a lot of marketing schlock or the jargon flavor of the month. And because really smart people constantly undersell themselves. In fact, smart people who don't are most likely narcissistic. (Yes, this means most 'rockstar' 'talent' is neither.)
The average person, regardless of what hip SV types spouting the kool-aid say, is unlikely to feel comfortable hiring someone who makes them feel threatened, confused, or inferior. Even with the best intent to hire people 'more talented' than the manager or existing developers, there're many other divides that preclude there being more than a small difference in skill.