undefined | Better HN

0 pointsosrec7y ago0 comments

> Even if it is a good developer, I don't believe the qualities of senior developer are being acquired so quickly.

So here's where I have my issue. Why can't someone acquire those qualities quickly? Why should your belief be factored in when gauging someone's expertise? I say, let's just look at their abilities and then decide. You may be surprised at how quickly some people pick up certain skills!

> Most of the people say they were promoted so their business can sell them as senior. That's BS. I would not like to work with those businesses. Keep calling yourselves seniors.

Here I agree with you. Random titles for the sake of duping people make no sense either and are potentially harmful.

> ps. I dealt with the same stigma, and I would feel ashamed when I joined a team where all the devs were 35+ with 10+ YOE and I would call myself the same title as they did. (I was 21 in this example, with 5 years of professional experience). Am I too humble?

I would say yes. If you are able to perform the same tasks as them, with the same/better level of finesse, then the only differentiator is age. Why shouldn't you have the same pay packet/title/respect? I believe age is generally positively correlated with experience (i.e. more age = more experience), but I feel it is not really correlated with insight (more age != better insight). Thus, sometimes, younger people can have better ideas and inputs than their older colleagues and deserve the 'senior' title as much as someone that's been working 30+ years, in my opinion.

0 comments

ponyous7y ago

> Why can't someone acquire those qualities quickly? Because there is no time to do the full cycle from start to release more than twice in 2 years.

Usually a project that will give you decent insights takes some time to build. Usually at least 6 months and then several months to see what you did wrong. So if you did this cycle once, you are not aware of how you screwed it up and if other methods would yield better results. If you did it twice you already have the basis to compare methods. Senior ideally tried several approaches and there is simply no time for this in 2 years imo.

> I would say yes...

Thanks. Looking at this thread I changed my perspective. 1. it's context based, you can be senior after 3 months if your other senior left and you have couple of new people that you need to onboard 2. titles mean absolutely nothing when hiring 3. If I am doing the same work as others I deserve the same title (age made me uncomfortable)

So yeah, initially I got offended because I called myself senior later than I could and it seemed unfair.

pjc507y ago

Yes, this is a bit of a micro version of the "should people developing software be allowed to call themselves engineers": some people want a formalised system which guarantees that people have passed certain tests and have a certain level of experience, other people observe that many of our heroes and CEOs are bright autodidacts. Is it a good idea to pull up the ladder? And besides, technology shifts and there are plenty of people working on technologies that weren't invented at the time they graduated. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard, Andy Grove was a refugee who would have great difficulty getting into 21st century America, etc.

I agree that a lot of vital expertise comes from mistaken attempts and the need to change strategies.

Joky7y ago

Just as another data point: I have been looking at it like you in the past, but now I’m getting old enough that I worked with enough engineers to realize that whole experience has a general correlation with seniority, there is a huge variation between individual.

I have in mind one of the most skilled and mature engineer I have ever collaborated with who has less than two years professional experience. I also worked with many 10y experienced folks who qualify as senior for this, but were pretty sloppy otherwise.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse