csmdev

It's the evil you know vs taking a chance on the unknown. Plus the short-term thinking that plagues most people.

This is why most companies fail eventually. Hiring and promoting based on relationships instead of skills. You can grow a relationship. But a bad employee will never get any better. Especially if you bump him up to management.

Did you stop and think why he is the team leader and not you? Maybe having a deeper understanding of something is more important than playing with multiple things at once.

Always switching technologies will get you only basic knowledge in each of them. Going past the surface requires daily use and years of constant evolution. That's how you become an expert in something. Deeper understanding. Not broader.

Learn what? A new thing every year? How do they become experts then?

Just because you learn a new language or technology doesn't mean you become better at problem solving. It just means that you can solve problems using a different tool.

So people that specialize in a field and become experts have no respect for the job. But the ones that hop around each year based on what's "hot" are better.

You do realize that you're basically dismissing experts because they specialize instead of learning the basics for another technology each year. Or has one year become enough to be an expert on something?

So basically be a freelancer. Market yourself heavily and learn whatever language or technology your employer uses. At this point, why get a job? You can easily earn more as a freelancer or contractor.

Employers want cheap workers and experience is seen as expensive. This is why most companies have one or two real developers and dozens of juniors learning on the job.

If you're experienced, you're better off building a startup.

You're fresh meat and cheaper. There are no downsides for hiring college grads. You take a low pay and learn the exact technology stack the company is using. But when you decide to change jobs, that's when the real fun starts.

Welcome to the bucket. I see you're new here. :)

Some tips for next time:

- if they want timed coding challenges or quizzes, skip them

- if they want you to work for a couple of days on a task to see your abilities, skip them

- if they don't accept a Skype interview and insist on going to their headquarters in another city, skip them

- if you're creative and like innovation, you're pretty much fucked because you don't fit the standard way of thinking

There is no shortage and there is no actual demand. Companies just want better people for less money. They say that are no more good developers. But what they mean is: "There are no skilled suckers that will accept our ridiculously low pay".

You need to jump through hoops only so they can get an easier recruiting process. You're no longer a valuable resource. You're just a mindless robot that needs to meet specific keywords. Doesn't matter if you learn, adapt or solve problems. All that matters is how you fit on a very specific recipe. Interviews are the same. Vomit the fizzbuzz solution, some "core programming" buzzwords and maybe two or three generic tasks with stupid loaded questions. And you're hired.

Software developers are now just employed freelancers. Doesn't matter how you think or what you can do. All you need is keywords and experience with highly specific things.

The interviewer is not actually interested in challenges you faced. He is interested in how to handled them. So simply prepare a good story about how you overcame adversity and solved a huge problem with an extremely intelligent solution. Interviewers love that kind of stuff.

This is already a known fact. Read about the education system in Finland to see the solution in action.

You're confusing white noise with independent audio cues.

Plus, I don't think anybody ignores keyboard typing sounds. They work just like car engine noises. Audio feedback for a physical action. The example you're searching for is keypad tones for smartphones. That's the concept behind your idea.

Sounds become annoying with time. But visual cues are often automated and ignored. This is why the current solution works best.

Because of the way we evolved, a sound automatically makes our brain alert. At first it's ok. But with time we learn that there is no actual danger. And the sound only becomes annoying. Making us alert for nothing.

Visual cues are treated differently. If something is deemed safe or accepted by the brain, you automatically start ignoring it and focus on something else. So an acknowledgement comes only when something is different. And even then, we simply notice it. It's not an actual alert like sound is.

So the idea is bad. It goes against the way our brains work.