Ah! This is a very good point. Good recruiters are outnumbered by bad ones, which are indistinguishable from spam. And yes, the more you put out the more you'll get.
1) is the person reaching out to you the hiring manager or some other non-recruiting leadership role? Always talk to them. These are golden and rare.
Even if you don't take a job there, it will be an interesting conversation and perhaps a valuable new connection.
2) has the recruiter read your fucking profile? Shout out to the recruiter who just emailed me about a hot new entry level javascript role. 🙋♀️
3) did the recruiter just send you a list of companies and jobs? 🚫
4) does the recruiter seem to genuinely know who you are? If they mention having seen a talk you did last year, and you have some connections in common who speak well of them, etc...it's worth a chat
Great recruiters exist, but they are embedded in communities for the long term.
I also love what @BrentO just said about blogging being a down payment on your next job.
There are a ton of *amazing* engineers out there who are basically unfindable for their areas of expertise. Their public profile is indistinguishable from that of a mid level rando.
When they get great opportunities, it's by word of mouth or not at all -- they just get a job as a cog somewhere.
Being a cog sucks. Nobody wants to be a cog. We want to build on our achievements, be recognized for them, achieve mastery. Increase our impact.
So. If you're among the record breaking hordes who have decided to seek better pastures, consider whether there are bread crumbs you could drop to help them find you for the specific, non coggy role of your dreams. 🙏💜
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I was just editing the o11y book chapter on build vs buy and ROI, and this sentence jumped out at me:
"High-performing organizations use great tools."
It's true, right? Behold all the FAANG engineers who leave their cushy perches and are shocked by the amount of tooling they had come to take for granted. It's almost like having to learn to engineer all over again
Big companies know how critical good tooling is, and pay for it.
I'm going to say two very contradictory things, both of which are true:
1) Tools are getting better and better, and you should try to keep up
2) Switching tooling is hard, and you should only do it when the gain is ~an order of magnitude better than what you've got.
You don't owe it to your employer to fix all the ways they are fucked up. Before going to battle, ask yourself:
* how much power do I have here?
* is the problem within my domain of responsibility or influence?
* who are my allies?
* do I have a reasonable chance of success?
and also: are they worth it? Is your employer fundamentally worth you staying and fighting? Is their product a net good for the world? Are your leaders decent, ethical people who care a lot?
If so, sure, pick some battles. See what happens. ☺️
Here we are, now going on the fourth straight month of headlines all about how a record number of people are quitting their jobs.
There's a lot of pain behind that statistic, but also a strident, activated edge to labor that feels unlike anything seen in my lifetime.
I am *all for* more people quitting their jobs. I am *all for* employers needing to compete for employees by treating them better, increasing their wages, and offering more flexibility and support.
Most people in our industry stay at jobs they don't love, far too long.
So here's a piece of advice that I find myself giving over and over again, to senior folks who are daunted by the prospect of having to go out and search for the right role, the right team, the right company ... it's like looking for a needle in a haystack, right? 😰
This is 100% true. What always jumps out at me is that there's always "the tracing expert(s)" that everybody goes to for help on the rare occasions when they need a trace. Fluency rarely transcends the few to reach the many.
I don't think it's this so much as it is that ... tracing is *inherently* a niche use case. A tracing-first approach to observability turns the world on its head for no good reason.
What most people want is the ability to slice and dice their requests,
Ostrich effect: ignoring an obvious (negative) situation
IKEA effect: The tendency for people to place a disproportionately high value on objects that they partially assembled themselves, such as furniture from IKEA, regardless of the quality of the end product
and some delightful ones that I failed to work in:
Zeigarnik effect: That uncompleted or interrupted tasks are remembered better than completed ones.
Tachypsychia: When time perceived by the individual either lengthens, making events appear to slow down, or contracts
the answer is no, we can't; there were no off the shelf columnar dbs, let alone any with flexible schemas or the rest of our wishlist.
if we had shoved it in an existing data store we would have looked and felt just like every other monitoring tool. same perf, same tradeoffs.
the VC's were right too, though; we did almost doom ourselves. 🙃 it took us nearly a year before we could even really start signing up users or BEGIN working on the product. it was 2.5-3 years til we found PMF.
meanwhile our seed investors gave up on us long before that.