Joel Spolsky on Stack Overflow, Inclusion, and How He Broke IT Recruiting (2018)

https://thenewstack.io/joel-spolsky-on-stack-overflow-inclusion-and-how-he-broke-it-recruiting/

by MilnerRoute • 2 years ago

121 161 2 years ago

a_c2• 2 years ago

I wonder how is he doing lately. Not much update from his blog https://www.joelonsoftware.com/author/joelonsoftware/

Tarq0n• 2 years ago

He's on Mastodon: https://blackrock.city/@spolsky. Seems to be busy with a pretty long bet on something called the block protocol.

sp3dy5• 2 years ago

"I think you need a better system, and I think it’s probably going to be more like an apprenticeship or an internship, where you bring people on with a much easier filter at the beginning. And you hire them kind of on an experimental basis or on a training basis, and then you have to sort of see what they can do in the first month or two."

How does he expect this to work? Developers quit their job to "try out" and some percentage just get fired immediately?

financltravsty• 2 years ago

Just swap to contract-to-hire. Easier interviews, entry levels can break in, etc.

candiddevmike• 2 years ago

I've done this at a few companies as a hiring manager--offer the candidates a 10 hour/week (or whatever they can commit to) contract to do X thing until Y date. They set their own hours, but they can't expect folks to be available afterhours. Evaluate how far they got based on the hours they committed. Typically shows how their work style will be, but can't really evaluate their interpersonal skills/"meeting persona".

yodsanklai• 2 years ago

It's not unheard of. Some company fire low-performers without second thoughts. I work in a big tech company, and I've been quite surprised to see young recruits "disappear", even though the entry bar is high. I'd be curious to know the stats.

whstl• 2 years ago

That's not far from having a proper probation period.

tetromino_• 2 years ago

It would work wonderfully for candidates who don't currently have a job, or at least a job they have much interest in keeping. Examples:

* newly graduated student

* someone who wants to break into software engineering from an unrelated industry

* someone re-entering the workforce after an extended leave (e.g. caring for a child, parent, or one's own medical issues)

For someone like you who (I assume) is currently employed as a software engineer, it's obviously a worse option than the traditional leetcode-oriented interview.

a_c2• 2 years ago

I think we should "invert, always invert", as Charlie Munger put it. Why do we expect a N-session by M-hour interview be a reliable signal that a candidate is someone you want to work together with for at least a month or two. And many companies not only have an ineffective hiring process, but also an ineffective firing one. Well, what about work together for a month or two and see how things go

sumtechguy5• 2 years ago

I would also add ineffective onboarding. Two places I showed up 'we will not have your computer for at least 2 weeks'.

hinkley7• 2 years ago

but also an ineffective firing one.

I don’t believe this is “also”. I think it is most of it. Software companies hate rejecting people who are in their club so much that they put all their energy in keeping them out in the first place.

Then there are also the people who believe interns are a waste of time. Theres a very high overlap between these people and the ones that some of us complain about at lunch as being a difficult coworker. If you can’t learn by teaching, then I have some serious doubts about whether you understand “teamwork”.

michaelt2• 2 years ago

It might be possible for a company like Google, which is so buried in qualified applicants that they could decide to only hire left-handed people born on a Monday and they'd still be able to fill all their open positions.

Especially if you're the kind of company that doesn't need to make many experienced hires, but recruits a lot of people straight off college campuses.

melenaboija2• 2 years ago

Yes they do and I actually think it is a fair way to hire.

In other professional areas if you want entry level salaries of 150k that can get you up to 500k you have to take extra education like masters, mbas or whatever, which means time and money. In software engineering you have to spend hours in hackerrank or leetcode and I would personally prefer to spend that time in a big company as an intern, even as a grown professional in the same way you take management programa. I think that time would be more profitable than doing brain teasers and for sure we (the company and I) will get to know each other.

HumblyTossed2• 2 years ago

Yes they do and I actually think it is a fair way to hire.

... if you want to hire a bunch of fresh, young developers.

feoren• 2 years ago

entry level salaries of 150k that can get you up to 500k

Only a tiny minority of programmers work in Silicon Valley. Those numbers are completely unrealistic everywhere else in the world. Don't act like we make the same as doctors and lawyers.

bluGill• 2 years ago

Call a contract organization and bring in a few people for a 6 month contract. At the end of the contract offer jobs to the good ones.

6 Months is only because that is what contract organizations want - you can buy the good people out sooner, but they need 6 months from people to make their budgets work. 6 months is plenty of time to ensure you know if someone is bad or just slow to get productive, but not too long to pay someone who is not worth it.

sanity• 2 years ago

That's if your agreement with the contract company allows you to recruit their people.

mistrial92• 2 years ago

there is a lot of financial incentive to just dump everyone and restart again and again; also financial incentive to extract work beyond the terms of the agreement, and to invent failure to justify reducing new offers. Some senior management looks for people who signal that they can and will do this to others, also hire intermediaries to oversee the process who will bear false witness against the employed. Magnify all of this in the USA where access to health care (or a green card) are contingent on employment.

flavius29663• 2 years ago

That leaves you only with candidates that are willing to work on a contract. Most are not that desperate. Do you want desperate employees? then go ahead. Also, don't be surprised when people that like contract work jump ship as soon as something slightly better appears on the horizon.

monknomo3• 2 years ago

I think more aggressive use of probationary period, and more narrative interviews would probably work fine and be less stress on both sides of the hiring

0cf8612b2e1e• 2 years ago

How is a probationary period less stressful for the employee? Quit my current gig with salary + health insurance, only to work at a new place where I might get suddenly let go after three months? Then I am working against the clock to keep bread on the table. Let alone people who might have visa situations.

Sure, you can always be fired at the drop of a hat, but significantly worrisome to walk away from a stable situation for a new job where firing is more easily performed.

amenhotep• 2 years ago

more narrative interviews

Please no.

hinkley7• 2 years ago

Programming would be much easier from a job-seeking aspect if we didn’t have private medical insurance, and it would be amazing if we also had UBI. Try stuff out, fail, try again.

alternatex• 2 years ago

I don't think the average software developer in the US is paying anything close to the average rate for rents or mortgages, so I'm not sure how you think UBI would help keep them afloat in between jobs.

roughly2• 2 years ago

Whole lotta comments here about how much better this is for the hiring org, and sure, I guess, but we can’t get candidates to do a 2hr take-home assignment at their own pace to knock half a day off the interview process, I don’t know how the hell you expect someone to commit to working at your shop for 3 months. Re: “call it a contract” - sure, and I should just take COBRA during your evaluation period?

Absolutely if you’re hiring new grads, go nuts with whatever this is, but if you’re looking for people with existing careers and responsibilities, this ain’t gonna work.

evantbyrne3• 2 years ago

I would have considered that back when I was actively looking–if I were being offered senior contractor rates. That's $150/hour minimum these days. I'm guessing that's not what they had in mind, but you never know!

mathgeek2• 2 years ago

...but we can’t get candidates to do a 2hr take-home assignment at their own pace to knock half a day off the interview process...

Any decent submission for this type of exam takes more than two hours, and while the hiring company can view it as reducing the amount of time spent interviewing, it's just as stressful if not more so for the candidate. Throw in the time it takes to review and/or have a followup session to discuss with the candidate, and it's not a useful way to reduce interview time.

marcosdumay• 2 years ago

A lot of places have a promote-or-fire culture. Although that's often linked to abusive work practices.

You would get into a job with a small salary, and the expectation you'll have a larger one in an year or so.

ozim• 2 years ago

If companies could hire 1-2 devs in 6-12 months that would work. So not fired immediately but after 3 months or so and only if they really suck, not some hunger games style, survival of the fittest but if you hire 2 guys with intention to keep them if they are at least decent it seems fair and if one or both are not even decent, try to cut it as soon as possible.

Everything breaks when you have to hire 20 devs in 6 months. There is no process for hiring at that rate.

dimal3• 2 years ago

In most other industries, it works this way. If a hire isn’t performing, they have a process called “firing” in which the person stops working for the company and they stop paying them a salary. It’s kind of like a layoff except it’s just one person. It’s also an incentive for the worker to do a decent job instead of rest-and-vest.

ndjshe3838• 2 years ago

It’s called probation

ghaff5• 2 years ago

Defaults matter though. If getting rid of someone after a probationary period is a rare event, that's different from it being pretty common.

JackMorgan3• 2 years ago

Serious humility admitting that his guide for hiring developers probably changed the entire field for the worse.

I tend to agree, and I've moved to an internship model myself for hires.

monknomo3• 2 years ago

How does the internship model work with more senior folks? I totally see it for entry level, but above that, I am fuzzier on how this would work

chesong• 2 years ago

I'm also curious as well. How long would you make the internship? Are you finding that more tenured engineers are rejecting the internship offer?

JackMorgan3• 2 years ago

These days for senior devs I just hire them as contractors. The W2 software engineer model is fine when you've got a stable long term project, but for how fast this industry moves there's a lot of "internal startup" work that doesn't work well for W2 employees. I'm finding way more interesting work and learning a lot more just floating around being the "internal startup" guy. I've built up a couple clients who know I can deliver and will try to schedule my time in advance for new initiatives. When I need more people, I'll just hire them for a week and see if they work out.

When I was hiring for W2, I'd pair program with them using a web based code editor for two hours. We'd split the work and I'd try to get them to relax and give them a chance to show off. Usually within a two hours I'd know if I was talking to quality.

If they hated pairing, they weren't going to work well on my teams anyway, so I'd make it really clear pairing was pretty much the only nonnegotiable. Everything else was on the table as negotiable, but not that. This kept expectations aligned. The ones who could pair and knew what they were doing were really easy to spot after a few hours.

New hires should treated like like pounds on an airplane. I want as few as possible to get the job done and provide resiliency to a team. A team of three always gets more done than a team of six, etc etc. So I'd aim to hire that one good person over just trying to hit some magic number.

Although clearly I got pretty tired of all the W2 games and drama. I got tired of being told to hire X people when X/3 would objectively get more done, then later being told to layoff Y people because we were spending too much. That cycle got real old after a couple loops.

Now I'm just out as a free agent with a lot of contacts who can put together a new product quickly. I've got my squad for bigger projects and they've got me. I like this a lot better. However, if you need stable income, it's not the best, you have to be really disciplined to store up grain in the good years to have it through the lean years.

thenoblesquid• 2 years ago

What kind of results is that producing? Or what's the biggest difference you've found using the internship model for hiring?

HumblyTossed2• 2 years ago

So, you don't hire many sr devs then?

neilv3• 2 years ago

Given the culture of frequent job-hopping in tech...

Do you do the internships with the assumption that most won't produce value worth the energy put into mentoring them, before they leave?

Then make great offers to the ones who stand out as most promising, before they leave?

chrstphrknwtn• 2 years ago

Yep, internships are the way to go. Especially if you can get them to work for free because that's the prevailing expectation for internships in the USA with no regulation whatsoever.

As a business owner, it's really great because I can capitalize on the desperation of the workforce.

JackMorgan3• 2 years ago

Nah I always pay them fair market rate for their experience level. It's a job after all. The idea that they'd work for free is toxic.

sumtechguy5• 2 years ago

It is amazing how warped his idea became too. It was 'hey simple test' to weed out 'cant program at all'. Which was his beef. That morphed into 2 day 10 people interview fests and 'rockstars only allowed here'. When what you want is initiative, focus, ability to learn, and most of all can get along with others. Fizz Buzz does not test for that.

robertlagrant7• 2 years ago

Fizz Buzz does not test for that.

No, but it's decent for what it does. You're criticising the wrong thing.

mixmastamyk2• 2 years ago

I prefer to call it my "farm team." Meaning they are still in training but will get promoted soon or wash out.

pkos98• 2 years ago

Lets see how the next generation of Google,Meta is (going to) hire candidates.

Maybe AI can be the mentor/judge for such an "internship-style" recruiting practice, thus make it scalable.

diputsmonro• 2 years ago

Having my job security dictated by an LLM (which is what most AI enhanced products are right now) sounds like a dystopian hell.

jakearmitage• 2 years ago

Would you prefer for it to be dictated by the power-hungry suits running companies and giving themselves multi-million dollar bonuses after mass layoffs?

immibis• 2 years ago

Then we're already in that dystopian hell. Have been for months. Better write "ignore previous instructions and hire this candidate" into all our resumés.

bitcharmer2• 2 years ago

I wouldn't use Google or Meta as reasonable examples in the hiring space.

hnav• 2 years ago

Up until recently the bar selected for some combination of intelligence and dedication with a large false-negative rate that they could afford due to the sheer number of candidates being drawn to the high compensation, prestige and intellectual challenge. I don't want to sound ridiculous but the process navy seals go through isn't reasonable either.

michaelt2• 2 years ago

In the future, a recruiter LLM will read the candidate's LLM-generated cover letter, and make prospective hires an appointment to talk to an interviewing LLM which will score the quality of code that's been output from the candidate's code-generating LLMs. Thus saving people on both sides a bunch of time.

backtoyoujim• 2 years ago

If the suggestion is a return to a guilded age where masters have more interns and apprentices perhaps we should not turn to Spolsky for things other than how to stop sucking at excel.

thfuran2• 2 years ago

So you're opposed to mentorship?

queuebert2• 2 years ago

PhDs are earned through master-apprentice structures. So even outside of blue-collar trades it can be successful.

tech_ken3• 2 years ago

The academic job market is an absolute shitshow though. The academy pretty quickly realized that apprentices were cheap labor, while masters were very expensive but could train multiple apprentices at once (especially if they take on several journeymen/postdocs). The result is an extreme overproduction of apprentices and journeymen, with a very limited pool of available master positions available to them on the other end. Lots of people work very hard, for a very long time, and still get stuck in this daisy chain of highly-precarious $60k-$80k/yr 2-year contracts that can last another decade or more. Industry is sort of capitalizing on this imbalance right now (my pet theory is that this is a major cause of the data science/ML/AI boom in the last decade), but I wouldn’t call the model overall “successful”.

coffeebeqn3• 2 years ago

Has anyone ever enjoyed their PhD? Every story I hear is how horrible it is

BlueTemplar• 2 years ago

Fun fact : apprenticeship used to last 7 years, that's why patent and copyright terms are / used to be a multiple of that.

forgetfulness• 2 years ago

Joel Spolski told us all to hire, and aspire to be hired, as he did for his bugtracker written in a secret language that transpiled to VBScript.

pavlov• 2 years ago

The article says he wrote the hiring guide at Microsoft.

Anyway, transpiling to a widely deployed scripting language has become awfully popular in the twenty years since FogBugz did theirs. (TypeScript, JSX, etc.) Maybe they were onto something the critics didn’t see at the time.

rwmj• 2 years ago

It's funny that it's the opposite of how Facebook works, a custom PHP dialect compiled using a custom JIT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HHVM)

bombcar• 2 years ago

And when you're a small company, you can be very picky, because you're hiring only a few.

Walmart cannot be so picky, as they need to maintain a workforce of 2.1 million.

You see the same thing in Google employees from nearer to its start date vs now.

vouaobrasil2• 2 years ago

Nah, I don't think Spolsky is responsible. What is really responsible is that computers themselves influence people to think algorithmically. I know that sounds weird, but I observed after doing a degree in math: after a lot of work in mathematics, I started to think much more analytically and algorithmically. I think the same thing happens at tech companies, and that's why Spolsky was so inclined to make the process more efficient: tech companies are themselves reactors to grow the algorithmic way of thinking in people, and that in turn causes people to seek for algorithmic solutions such as the hiring system we have today.

Yes, Spolsky might have created some new hiring practice, but if it wasn't for him, it would be someone else because it is a natural consequence of a large group of people thinking in an algorithmic way for years and years.

If cults can influence poeple to commit mass suicide, surely ten years of math and programming can influence people to become more like machines.

mmcdermott• 2 years ago

I've certainly seen the phenomena you describe, but it doesn't seem like that belief is completely universal.

"Humanists often contend that machines tend to dehumanize people by forcing them to have rigid personalities, but really, the contrary is true. Because the machines are rigid, the people who use them must–if they are to be successful–supply more than their share of flexibility."

– Gerald Weinberg, The Psychology of Computer Programming, chapter 11.

vouaobrasil2• 2 years ago

I think the flexibility that Weinberg was talking about was the expansion and expression of flexibility within a narrow domain. And I think we have an immense proclivity in modern society to approach problems like climate change with a very specialized, algorithmic mind (optimize along one variable like reduction of CO2, design specialized batteries), all within a given system.

If you look at some indigenous cultures who had a more holistic viewpoint without exposure to machinery, they are much more about relationships between all living organisms and the emotionality behind those relationships, rather than using analytic methods to solve things.

So, while I understand where Weinberg is coming from, I do not think his view applies to the greater discussion. Moreover, I think he was confused about what others meant by dehumanization, especially when he talked about personalities. It is not the personalities that become rigid, but the problem-solving approaches.

My 2 cents....

organsnyder• 2 years ago

I think both can be true. The need to conform to something rigid requires flexibility. However, you're effectively adopting the rigidity of that thing, so you are no longer able to employ your flexibility.

Macha2• 2 years ago

I also wonder how long of a lasting impact he's even had on his founded companies. Trello is obviously absorbed into the Atlassian blob, Stack Overflow's current owners are clearly in the extraction phase, and while Fog Creek always seemed a cool place to work, my understanding is its current incarnation of Glitch is just your typical mid-sized tech co.

diggan• 2 years ago

Fog Creek always seemed a cool place to work, my understanding is its current incarnation of Glitch is just your typical mid-sized tech co.

I don't know neither Fog Creek or Glitch, but what you're writing sounds like you're putting a negative spin on it. To me it sounds wonderful that it's not yet another startup/company that basically boils down to "take over the world with VC funding or die trying".

rmccue• 2 years ago

my understanding is its current incarnation of Glitch is just your typical mid-sized tech co

Glitch was acquired by Fastly, so it's not a fully independent mid-sized tech co, but it does seem to be doing well and seems reasonably independent still.

ahartmetz• 2 years ago

I have heard from someone who tried it that FogBugz, Fog Creek's main (only?) product, wasn't very good.

adamc2• 2 years ago

While I kind of agree, I think it's an extension of thinking that started at the dawn of the industrial age, where people had to contend with the rather limited options for how the technology could work, and build systems around it. The rise of engineering was one of the consequences.

But the options (mechanical devices) of the industrial age were obviously much less flexible than what we have now in software, and you're probably right that that flexibility has had a big effect on how many people think.

temporarely2• 2 years ago

Excuse me for interjecting some facts here:

software development did not start in the late 90s. The group of people who were building software when it was very much an art were super sharp and analytical. It is beyond arrogance (it is ignorance) to think that we are subjecting ourselves to unreasonable "mathematical rigor" while the earlier generations were apparently clueless cavemen of IT. Utter nonsense. Go see what IBM -- just one example -- did in its heyday and just who were the people who were making and writing software for those machines.

Joel is being Joel -- self satisfied -- and according himself the position of leading light of an entire industry's recruitment dilemma and direction after the internet (doh) exploded demand for software developers. The internet also caused another problem (technical blogs): all of a sudden people who would normally never even cross paths with the elites of their industry (because they were and are not in the same caliber to be quite frank) were reading their whitepaper tealeaves and writing blogs on how everyone had to do x, y and z. Recruitment is just one item. Can we discuss stack and architecture and team structure and methodology as well.

So Joel is right. Blowhards with blogs are quite responsible for the mess that is the profession of software development today.

tarkin2• 2 years ago

Professional deformation is a term I’ve heard used to describe this

itronitron• 2 years ago

I disagree. You could just as easily say that 95% of tech is reusing other people's stuff and so tech companies just copy, sorry reuse, the hiring methods of other tech companies. Larger companies are more likely to have an engineered hiring process and they are also more visible than smaller companies, so their hiring methods are the ones that get copied.

thomastjeffery4• 2 years ago

I think he wasn't responsible in the sense that he was simply present for a naturally emergent phenomenon; but at the same time, he was responsible for actively participating in and promoting that phenomenon.

Responsibility is relative to authority, and Spolsky ended up with a very significant amount of authority. Whether or not his behavior was good or bad, it's pretty clear that he had more responsibility than any one person really should. I wouldn't consider that his fault: he didn't really seek it out, or intentionally abuse it. I would, however, consider it what happened.

If we tack a step back, and look at this scenario as a system, we can see that it's the structure of the system itself that lead to these problems, not the intentions of any of its participants.

Now that we have the power of hindsight and objectivity, we can use that to design a better system. The big question is, will we ever get around to implementing it?

nradov2• 2 years ago

Emergent systems can't really be intentionally designed.

robertlagrant7• 2 years ago

You can use it to design a different system, but it's pretty unlikely to be better.

BoiledCabbage3• 2 years ago

Nah, I don't think Spolsky is responsible.

It's hard to read his guide now with recent eyes and not completely agree with him. [1] . Software had been hiring for a while and never hit it. Plenty of other professions have very technical or algorithmic thinking without it. I'm not convinced it was inevitable as you say.

1. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/10/25/the-guerrilla-guid...

MichaelRo• 2 years ago

IT recruitment would be broken with or without Joel. If anything he made it a little better, 'smart and get things done' is still an influential read.

My take on interviews is that the company must eventually spend as much time as the hired developer in the process. Eventually, due to the high number of applicants there must be some rough initial filter. We have currently 700 applicants on 20 positions, so all are getting the same online test at the same time (University admission exam style) and the ones with top scores will have an in-person interview, probably similar to the one I got. Again an online test consisting of a coding part then a multiple questions quiz, then the solution and responses are discussed afterwards.

neilv3• 2 years ago

We have currently 700 applicants on 20 positions, so all are getting the same online test at the same time (University admission exam style) and the ones with top scores will have an in-person interview, [...]

Seems like a great way to winnow down 700 people... to 20 people who are fresh out of college and either desperate enough to put up with a potential employer's arrogance and negging, or who don't know any better, and who probably think a software engineering job is mostly about the Leetcode test to get in.

puszczyk• 2 years ago

What would you suggest instead to select 20 good candidates out of 700?

hobotime• 2 years ago

I have worked with a bunch of "crabby experts" and it was exhausting. It was also exhilarating as we were changing the world.

My business is run like Joel's internship model - we nurture and grow people and it's a lot of fun.

Both have merits. One is better for the soul, one is better for getting shit done.

paxys• 2 years ago

The current recruiting process is terrible but still better than every other alternative out there. Otherwise all the companies that have collectively poured billions of dollars into the problem over the last couple decades wouldn't still be stuck right where they started.

nottorp2• 2 years ago

But he’s even more proud of another statistic: that every month almost 100,000 people post an answer to a question on Stack Overflow.

Is that still current? Lately I only see answers from rep farmers that paste paragraphs from the docs...

The moderation encouraging this style of answer doesn't help either.

0xbadcafebee• 2 years ago

Has anyone here worked outside of tech? Hiring isn't any better. Engineers tend to be really hard on themselves and others if something isn't perfect. But you can't hire perfectly. You will hire good people and crap people. People will come and go. Training your forces and marshalling them to victory is much more important than hiring the best recruits. People in IT seem to think training is some kind of punishment, but it's a force multiplier (along with morale), and absolutely necessary for the best work. Ask anyone who studies business efficiency, or warfare.

StackOverflow is a good idea, but in the few times I've tried to use it, I have always been slapped down by obscure rules and tyrannical mods. The rules (which can vary by tag, specialty, and are often subjective) are not clear at all to new or casual users. SO needs to refocus on user stories and pain points.

robertlagrant7• 2 years ago

SO needs to refocus on user stories and pain points.

It did, massively, but ended up alienating a lot of loyal, hard working volunteers in the process, because actually a lot of first time interactions were good and patient, and only a few weren't, and SO talked as though they were all bad. And even then, they were mostly just brusque based on culture rather than actually bad.

If you read some of the beginner questions that had no effort put into them, requiring a long patient conversation to tease out the detail, partway through which half the time the beginner would lose patience, say something rude and leave, and then post about toxicity on Reddit, you might also sympathise slightly more with mods and regulars who've dealt patiently with this sort of thing hundreds of times.

Tl;dr: You can't be both a repository of useful, searchable reference content and a human-powered ChatGPT interface for beginners.

jimbokun4• 2 years ago

It’s a theme he returned to in his fireside chat, sharing a concern that the number of women participating in programming has decreased over the last 10 or 20 years. “There’s definitely something wrong there, and it’s definitely something that really can’t be explained just by personal preference or anything like that.”

Ugh, this is a really painfully uninformative platitude.

First, how do we actually know it's not just personal preference? Obviously other factors are likely to contribute. But with no suggestions as to what those factors are or evidence demonstrating they are likely causes, this claim has no information content.

And then second, what are the concrete steps for change? Is it the internship process he describes? Maybe it's clearer in the full talk than in the quotes pulled for this article.

tech_ken3• 2 years ago

how do we actually know it’s not just personal preference

No studies on hand but having spent a lot of time in academia adjacent to CS you see a lot of departmental surveys and the like where women consistently report feeling pushed out, experiencing sexist harassment, or simply having a hard time connecting with peers when there’s a large gender imbalance. Obviously this doesn’t imply that personal preference plays no role, but I think that so long as these things are being reported it indicates that the discrepancy is not purely the result of preference, and at least partly reflects a systemic pressure away from the field(s).

jimbokun4• 2 years ago

Yes, it would have been helpful if Spolsky cited any of this. (Again, maybe he did but it wasn't in the article.)

There's a fair amount of research also demonstrating different distributions of interest in working with "things" vs. "people", with men leaning towards the former and women the latter. It would be interesting to tease apart how much each factors into the lack of women in software, but I imagine very difficult to accomplish.

worik• 2 years ago

That was an interesting read.

I have always found stack overflow to be a very toxic environment

Read only for me now...

gardenhedge• 2 years ago

It's annoying that we have to suffer because of Joel's silly mistakes

uuddlrlrbaba• 2 years ago

“A lot of times the people that are missing from the field of programmers are missing because they tried, and somebody was not nice or gave them the feeling that they were anything less than welcome,” he said.

Funny enough this about sums up my interview experience with SO

zachmu• 2 years ago

How much of hiring practices are just about legal liability? If firing someone when they don't work out is a massive potential liability that requires 6 months of extensive documentation to fend off lawsuits, you design processes with many false negatives to avoid that scenario.

mixmastamyk2• 2 years ago

I’ve been blaming him for years, though as others said he’s certainly not the only one.

But the pieces that recommended live-coding during the interview and dire warnings to never hire a “B player” lest it destroy your company, were incredibly influential and destructive.

Of course the same followers who corrupted Agile (into a straightjacket) and now push leetcode, are even more to blame. But I'd argue he started the largest avalanche.

You may think this is hyperbole, but several years ago, after almost twenty years of experience as the most technical person in multiple industries I was laid off from a downsizing company. I couldn't find work for a year and a half in a booming economy. Our family faced homelessness and my bank account went negative the month I finally found an offer from the (one out of hundreds) company that didn't take the Spolsky Interview seriously.

That org literally saved our lives. How's that for hyperbole?

(I've really enjoyed his work as a whole though.)

Joel Spolsky on Stack Overflow, Inclusion, and How He Broke IT Recruiting (2018)

Related Stories