When people tell me that I should "do projects in my own free time to keep my skills sharp", it throws me into a fit of rage and makes me want to tear them a new one. Do you see any other professions having to do that in order to stay employable? Can you imagine lawyers having to practice law in their free time to "keep their skills sharp"? Can you imagine civil engineers having to draft plans for bridges and buildings in order not to "destroy their ability to make a living"? Or doctors or any other high prestige professions doing anything like that?
If the answer is no, then WHY THE FUCK should I have to spend my free time maintaining a bunch of projects on Github just so I could keep providing for myself? Is what I do in my day job not good enough anymore? Now I can't even apply for a new job listing "backbone.js" as a requirement unless I have it listed in my resume or have a Github project utilizing it? Whatever happened to the notion of smart people being able to pick up and learn new technologies on the job? You think it's okay to try to offload the risk and the time necessary to pick up a new technology to an employee and their free time, vs. providing the time and the resources for learning on the job?
Tell you what OP, you can take that attitude elsewhere, I'm not buying it. I prefer spending my free time having great interactions with my friends and my girlfriend, enjoying traveling and getting new experiences and just making the most of this one life that I have. Now, If you believe that my system of values is incompatible with yours/your company's, then I don't want to work for you because you're an arrogant exploitative asshole with no respect for other people and their time/life.
This is the way you should do hiring, if you happen to have any semblance of fairness and intelligence:
If a senior person with a somewhat outdated skill set applies for a job, then you're not supposed to test them on the latest technologies, you are supposed to take a look at their track record and try to figure whether they are generally a smart person and whether they were able to get things done back in the day. If someone was a good programmer 20 years ago, then they will be just as good now, if not better, because it's ultimately a person's intelligence and attitude that determines how good a performer they are, not a list of buzzwords on their resume. If you don't get this, then I'm sorry to say, you probably aren't very bright.
Caveat: if you are moving extremely fast for some reason or need something done IMMEDIATELY, then it makes sense to hire someone who already has the skill set you're looking for. If it's a long term assignment/project, what technology they know/don't know has no bearing on how good they will ultimately perform.
PS. You have inadvertently confirmed everything another blogger wrote in a post about why a career in programming ultimately has low prestige:
http://www.halfsigma.com/2007/03/why_a_career_in.html
If the answer is no, then WHY THE FUCK should I have to spend my free time maintaining a bunch of projects on Github just so I could keep providing for myself? Is what I do in my day job not good enough anymore? Now I can't even apply for a new job listing "backbone.js" as a requirement unless I have it listed in my resume or have a Github project utilizing it? Whatever happened to the notion of smart people being able to pick up and learn new technologies on the job? You think it's okay to try to offload the risk and the time necessary to pick up a new technology to an employee and their free time, vs. providing the time and the resources for learning on the job?
Tell you what OP, you can take that attitude elsewhere, I'm not buying it. I prefer spending my free time having great interactions with my friends and my girlfriend, enjoying traveling and getting new experiences and just making the most of this one life that I have. Now, If you believe that my system of values is incompatible with yours/your company's, then I don't want to work for you because you're an arrogant exploitative asshole with no respect for other people and their time/life.
This is the way you should do hiring, if you happen to have any semblance of fairness and intelligence:
If a senior person with a somewhat outdated skill set applies for a job, then you're not supposed to test them on the latest technologies, you are supposed to take a look at their track record and try to figure whether they are generally a smart person and whether they were able to get things done back in the day. If someone was a good programmer 20 years ago, then they will be just as good now, if not better, because it's ultimately a person's intelligence and attitude that determines how good a performer they are, not a list of buzzwords on their resume. If you don't get this, then I'm sorry to say, you probably aren't very bright.
Caveat: if you are moving extremely fast for some reason or need something done IMMEDIATELY, then it makes sense to hire someone who already has the skill set you're looking for. If it's a long term assignment/project, what technology they know/don't know has no bearing on how good they will ultimately perform.
PS. You have inadvertently confirmed everything another blogger wrote in a post about why a career in programming ultimately has low prestige:
http://www.halfsigma.com/2007/03/why_a_career_in.html