The author reflects on their time at Google, highlighting both positive and negative aspects. They appreciated the brilliant colleagues, ample resources, and impact of their work, while also acknowledging the bureaucratic processes, internal politics, and feeling of being a small cog in a massive machine. Ultimately, they left Google for a smaller company, seeking greater ownership and a faster pace, but acknowledge the invaluable experience and skills gained during their tenure. They advise current Googlers to proactively seek fulfilling projects and avoid getting bogged down in the corporate structure.
This Hacker News thread from April 2025 serves as a place for companies to post job openings and for individuals to seek employment. The original poster initiates the monthly "Who is hiring?" thread, inviting companies to share details about available positions, including location (remote or in-person), required skills, and company information. Job seekers are also encouraged to share their experience, desired roles, and location preferences. Essentially, the thread functions as an open marketplace connecting potential employers and employees within the tech community.
The Hacker News thread "Ask HN: Who is hiring? (April 2025)" is a continuation of a long-running series, and this iteration has attracted numerous comments from companies seeking talent and individuals looking for work. Many comments list specific roles and companies, often with links to job boards or application pages. Common areas of hiring include software engineering (front-end, back-end, full-stack), machine learning/AI, DevOps, and cybersecurity. Some commenters discuss the job market generally, noting desired skills or remote work opportunities. There's also a noticeable trend of AI-related roles, highlighting the continued growth in that sector. Several comments focus on specific locations, indicating a preference for certain geographic areas. Finally, some responses engage in humorous banter typical of these threads, expressing hopes for future employment or commenting on the cyclical nature of the "Who's Hiring" posts.
Frustrated with LinkedIn's limitations, a developer created OpenSpot, a networking platform prioritizing authentic connections and valuable interactions. OpenSpot aims to be a more user-friendly and less cluttered alternative, focusing on genuine engagement rather than vanity metrics. The platform features "Spots," dedicated spaces for focused discussions on specific topics, encouraging deeper conversations and community building. It also offers personalized recommendations based on user interests and skills, facilitating meaningful connections with like-minded individuals and potential collaborators.
HN commenters were largely unimpressed with OpenSpot, viewing it as a generic networking platform lacking a clear differentiator from LinkedIn. Several pointed out the difficulty of bootstrapping a social network, emphasizing the "chicken and egg" problem of attracting both talent and recruiters. Some questioned the value proposition, suggesting LinkedIn's flaws stem from its entrenched position, not its core concept. Others criticized the simplistic UI and generic design. A few commenters expressed a desire for alternative professional networking platforms but remained skeptical of OpenSpot's ability to gain traction. The prevailing sentiment was that OpenSpot didn't offer anything significantly new or compelling to draw users away from established platforms.
Will Larson's "Career Advice in 2025" predicts the evolving job landscape, emphasizing the growing importance of generalist skills alongside specialized expertise. The rise of AI will demand adaptability and a focus on uniquely human capabilities like complex problem-solving, creativity, and communication. Building a strong network, embracing lifelong learning, and demonstrating initiative through personal projects will be crucial for career advancement. Rather than chasing specific job titles, individuals should cultivate transferable skills and seek opportunities to develop a broad understanding of their industry, positioning themselves for a rapidly changing future of work.
HN commenters largely agreed with the author's premise that specializing in AI/ML while maintaining broad software engineering skills is a strong career strategy. Several pointed out the importance of "engineering out of" AI/ML roles as they become commoditized, emphasizing the ability to adapt. Some debated the long-term viability of "prompt engineering," with skepticism about its longevity as a specialized skill. Others highlighted adjacent areas like data engineering, MLOps, and AI safety as potentially valuable specializations. A few commenters offered alternative perspectives, suggesting that focusing on fundamental computer science principles remains crucial, and that over-specialization in a rapidly evolving field could be risky. There was also discussion around the importance of domain expertise, regardless of the technological landscape.
This Hacker News thread from March 2025 serves as a job board where companies and individuals can post about open positions or their availability for hire. The original poster kicks off the thread with a request for companies currently hiring, inviting them to share details about open roles, company culture, and compensation. The ensuing thread is expected to become a collection of job postings across various sectors, experience levels, and locations, offering a resource for those seeking new opportunities.
The Hacker News thread "Ask HN: Who is hiring? (March 2025)" contains numerous comments from companies seeking to fill various roles. Several commenters express skepticism and frustration about the frequency and perceived low quality of these "Who's Hiring" threads, suggesting they've become less useful due to noise and repetition. Some suggest alternative approaches like dedicated job boards or more structured threads within Hacker News. There's a mix of companies listing specific open positions, ranging from software engineering to marketing, alongside individuals offering their services as freelancers or contractors. Several comments also highlight the importance of remote work options, indicating a continued strong preference for this work arrangement.
Vibecoders is a satirical job board poking fun at vague and trendy hiring practices in the tech industry. It mocks the emphasis on "culture fit" and nebulous soft skills by advertising positions requiring skills like "crystal-clear communication" and "growth mindset" without any mention of specific technical requirements. The site humorously highlights the absurdity of prioritizing these buzzwords over demonstrable coding abilities. Essentially, it's a joke about the frustrating experience of encountering job postings that prioritize "vibe" over actual skills.
Hacker News users expressed significant skepticism and humor towards "vibecoding." Many interpreted it as a satirical jab at vague or meaningless technical jargon, comparing it to other buzzwords like "synergy" and "thought leadership." Some jokingly suggested related terms like "wavelength alignment" and questioned how to measure "vibe fit." Others saw a kernel of truth in the concept, linking it to the importance of team dynamics and communication styles, but generally found the term itself frivolous and unhelpful. A few comments highlighted the potential for misuse in excluding individuals based on subjective perceptions of "vibe." Overall, the reaction was predominantly negative, viewing "vibecoding" as another example of corporate jargon obscuring actual skills and experience.
Traditional technical interviews, relying heavily on coding challenges like LeetCode-style problems, are becoming obsolete due to the rise of AI tools that can easily solve them. This renders these tests less effective at evaluating a candidate's true abilities and problem-solving skills. The author argues that interviews should shift focus towards assessing higher-level thinking, system design, and real-world problem-solving. They suggest incorporating methods like take-home projects, pair programming, and discussions of past experiences to better gauge a candidate's potential and practical skills in a collaborative environment. This new approach recognizes that coding proficiency is only one component of a successful software engineer, and emphasizes the importance of broader skills like collaboration, communication, and practical application of knowledge.
HN commenters largely agree that AI hasn't "killed" the technical interview, but has exposed its pre-existing flaws. Many argue that rote memorization and LeetCode-style challenges were already poor indicators of real-world performance. Some suggest focusing on practical skills, system design, and open-ended problem-solving. Others highlight the potential of AI as a collaborative tool for both interviewers and interviewees, assisting with code generation and problem exploration. Several commenters also express concern about the equity implications of AI-assisted interview prep, potentially exacerbating existing disparities. A recurring theme is the need to adapt interviewing practices to assess the skills truly needed in a post-AI coding world.
The blog post "The Ideal Candidate Will Be Punched In the Stomach" argues against unrealistic job requirements and the pursuit of the "perfect" candidate. It uses the metaphor of a stomach punch to illustrate how life, and by extension a career, throws unexpected challenges. Companies should look for resilient candidates who can adapt and learn, rather than those who appear flawless on paper. The post emphasizes the importance of valuing growth potential and problem-solving skills over a pristine resume, suggesting companies prioritize candidates who demonstrate grit, adaptability, and a willingness to learn from mistakes. Ultimately, it encourages a more pragmatic and humane approach to hiring.
Hacker News users generally found the "punch in the stomach" analogy in the linked article to be overly aggressive and not reflective of real-world hiring practices. Several commenters pointed out that good candidates often have multiple offers, giving them leverage to decline unreasonable requests or hostile interview environments. The idea of deliberately creating stressful interview situations was criticized as ineffective and potentially discriminatory. Some argued that such tactics reveal more about the interviewer and company culture than the candidate's abilities. A few commenters suggested the article was satirical or clickbait, while others offered alternative, more practical advice for evaluating candidates, such as focusing on skills and experience rather than manufactured stress tests.
This Hacker News thread from February 2025 serves as a place for companies to post job openings and for individuals to seek employment. The original poster encourages companies to include details like location (remote or in-person), relevant experience or skills required, and a brief description of the role and company. Individuals seeking employment are asked to share their experience, desired roles, and location preferences. The thread aims to facilitate connections between job seekers and companies in the tech industry and related fields.
The Hacker News thread linked is an "Ask HN: Who is hiring?" thread for February 2025. As such, the comments consist primarily of job postings from various companies, listing roles, required skills, and sometimes company culture details. There are also comments from individuals seeking specific roles or expressing interest in certain industries. Some commenters offer advice on job searching or inquire about remote work possibilities. Due to the nature of the thread, most comments are concise and factual rather than offering extensive opinions or discussions. There's no single "most compelling" comment as the value of each depends on the reader's job search needs.
This Hacker News post is a job seeker thread for February 2025. The original poster invites anyone looking for a new role to share their skills, experience, and desired job type, encouraging both full-time and contract positions. They also suggest including location preferences and salary expectations to help potential employers quickly assess fit. Essentially, it's a place for job seekers to advertise themselves directly to the Hacker News community.
The Hacker News comments on the "Ask HN: Who wants to be hired? (February 2025)" post express a mix of skepticism, humor, and genuine interest. Several commenters question the practicality of the post, pointing out the difficulty of predicting hiring needs so far in advance, especially given the rapidly changing tech landscape. Some joke about the unpredictability of the future, referencing potential societal collapses or technological advancements that could render the question moot. Others engage more seriously, discussing the types of skills they anticipate being in demand in 2025, such as AI expertise and cybersecurity. A few commenters express interest in specific roles or industries, while others simply offer their resumes or portfolios for consideration. Overall, the comments reflect the uncertainty of the future job market while also demonstrating a proactive approach to career planning.
The original poster asks how the prevalence of AI tools like ChatGPT is affecting technical interviews. They're curious if interviewers are changing their tactics to detect AI-generated answers, focusing more on system design or behavioral questions, or if the interview landscape remains largely unchanged. They're particularly interested in how companies are assessing problem-solving abilities now that candidates have easy access to AI assistance for coding challenges.
HN users discuss how AI is impacting the interview process. Several note that while candidates may use AI for initial preparation and even during technical interviews (for code generation or debugging), interviewers are adapting. Some are moving towards more project-based assessments or system design questions that are harder for AI to currently handle. Others are focusing on practical application and understanding, asking candidates to explain the reasoning behind AI-generated code or challenging them with unexpected twists. There's a consensus that simply regurgitating AI-generated answers won't suffice, and the ability to critically evaluate and adapt remains crucial. A few commenters also mentioned using AI tools themselves to create interview questions or evaluate candidate code, creating a sort of arms race. Overall, the feeling is that interviewing is evolving, but core skills like problem-solving and critical thinking are still paramount.
The Hacker News "Who is hiring?" trends reveal a consistent demand for software engineers, particularly back-end and full-stack developers. Remote work remains prevalent, with many companies embracing fully distributed teams. While specific technologies fluctuate, Python, JavaScript/TypeScript, and React continue to be highly sought-after skills. Industries like AI/ML, DevOps, and security show increasing prominence, reflecting the evolving tech landscape. Overall, the job market depicted through these trends appears robust for skilled tech professionals, with an emphasis on adaptable and experienced individuals.
Hacker News commenters discuss the stagnation and decline of certain tech roles, particularly those related to web development and mobile. Several point out the oversaturation of these areas, contrasting it with the continued demand for specialized roles like embedded systems and hardware. Some commenters note the potential impact of AI, both in automating existing jobs and creating new, specialized AI-related roles. The increasing requirement for senior-level experience in many listings is also highlighted, with speculation about whether this reflects genuine need or simply a desire for experienced hires capable of immediate productivity. Finally, a few commenters lament the scarcity of remote opportunities outside the US, despite the purported rise of remote work.
The author recounts failing a FizzBuzz coding challenge during a job interview, despite having significant programming experience. They were asked to write the solution on a whiteboard without an IDE, a task they found surprisingly difficult due to the pressure and lack of syntax highlighting/autocompletion. They stumbled on syntax and struggled to articulate their thought process while writing, ultimately producing incorrect and messy code. The experience highlighted the disconnect between real-world coding practices and the artificial environment of whiteboard interviews, leaving the author questioning their value. Though disappointed, they reflected on the lessons learned and the importance of practicing coding fundamentals even with extensive experience.
HN commenters largely sided with the author of the blog post, finding the interviewer's dismissal based on a slightly different FizzBuzz implementation unreasonable and indicative of a poor hiring process. Several pointed out that the requested solution, printing "FizzBuzz" only when divisible by both 3 and 5 instead of by either 3 or 5, is not the typical understanding of FizzBuzz and creates unnecessary complexity. Some questioned the interviewer's coding abilities and suggested the company dodged a bullet by not hiring the author. A few commenters, however, defended the interviewer, arguing that following instructions precisely is critical and that the author's code technically failed to meet the stated requirements. The ambiguity of the prompt and the interviewer's apparent unwillingness to clarify were also criticized as red flags.
Summary of Comments ( 710 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43658089
HN commenters largely discuss the author's experience with burnout and Google's culture. Some express skepticism about the "golden handcuffs" narrative, arguing that high compensation should offset long hours if the work is truly enjoyable. Others empathize with the author, sharing similar experiences of burnout and disillusionment within large tech companies. Several commenters note the pervasiveness of performance anxiety and the pressure to constantly prove oneself, even at senior levels. The value of side projects and personal pursuits is also highlighted as a way to maintain a sense of purpose and avoid becoming solely defined by one's job. A few commenters suggest that the author's experience may be specific to certain teams or roles within Google, while others argue that it reflects a broader trend in the tech industry.
The Hacker News post titled "Googler... ex-Googler" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43658089) has generated a significant number of comments discussing the linked article about an ex-Googler's experience. Several recurring themes and compelling points emerge from the discussion.
Many commenters focus on the perceived decline of Google's innovative spirit and its shift towards prioritizing short-term profits over ambitious, long-term projects. Some former Google employees corroborate the author's sentiments, sharing their own experiences of increasing bureaucracy, risk aversion, and a focus on metrics that stifle creativity. They express nostalgia for a time when Google felt more experimental and less corporate. Others push back against this narrative, arguing that large companies inevitably evolve and that maintaining the same level of rapid innovation as a startup is unrealistic. They also point out the inherent challenges of managing a company of Google's scale and the need for processes and structure.
Another significant thread of discussion revolves around the concept of "golden handcuffs." Commenters discuss how high salaries and generous benefits at companies like Google can create a sense of complacency and make it difficult for employees to leave, even if they are dissatisfied with the work environment or the direction of the company. This, some argue, contributes to the perceived decline in innovation, as employees become more focused on maintaining their comfortable positions than taking risks.
Several comments also touch upon the author's point about the dominance of meetings and the feeling of being constantly busy without achieving meaningful progress. Some commenters share similar experiences from their own workplaces, suggesting this is a widespread issue in the tech industry, not unique to Google. Others offer practical advice for managing meeting overload and improving productivity.
The discussion also delves into the challenges of performance reviews and the potential for bias and unfairness. Some commenters express skepticism about the effectiveness of performance review systems, especially in large organizations, and suggest alternative approaches for evaluating employee contributions.
Finally, several commenters discuss the author's decision to leave Google and the trade-offs involved in pursuing different career paths. Some express admiration for the author's willingness to take a risk and pursue his own passions, while others caution against romanticizing startup life and emphasize the importance of considering the financial and personal implications of such decisions.
Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post offer a diverse range of perspectives on the author's experience and provide valuable insights into the challenges and complexities of working in the tech industry, particularly at large companies like Google. The discussion highlights the tension between innovation and stability, the allure and drawbacks of high compensation, and the importance of finding a work environment that aligns with one's personal values and career aspirations.