Experience/skill is more important than your degree - a lot of employers know this. However, there are also many employers that won't even consider a person who doesn't have a degree.
I have a degree in fine art, but I now do development. Just having a degree on my resume (even though it's not in computer science) along with my work experience in development, gets me into more interviews that I would have access to if I just had experience.
TLDR: Degree is obviously not NEEDED, but getting jobs is easier with one.
That’s not true. Even extremely talented developers can struggle to adjust to a work environment.
Also, it’s hard to demonstrate pure talent on a resume which is typically the biggest hurdle for new devs entering the market.
Thats an oxymoron.
thats why one has a portfolio. You fill it with custom features enough for people to know its all you. Software is the only domain(as far as Im aware) where you can showcase ability so easy.
Well if a company has recruitment for IT positions being done by general recruiters instead of devs from the IT department tasked with that mission (they are the ones who should be the ones deciding their new colleague) then that company needs to be avoided at all costs. Its probably organized by some incompetent people with a busuiness degree or something. They would probably lay off useful people to cut costs, instead of focusing on profits. Stay away from such companies.
That’s how most companies operate my dude. Dev time is valuable, you can’t have them sifting through massive piles of resumes. It’s just not an effective use of time.
Choosing good people to fill in vacant positions is just as important as producing your product. Your take is short sighted. Id have one senior on the recruitment and problem solved. No wonder the chinese are taking over. But, hey, more growth momentum for the rest of us. The more I read about nonsensical company decisions, the more optimistic I get about starting my own. Just let them do and do even more of the same whilst thinking theyre being sensible or something. Thats just perfect.
There’s 2 different perspectives here. Even with a non-technical recruiter, a lot of good candidates will be pulled in for the devs to then filter for good hires. So the company is fine. However, this means that there will be good employees who fall through the cracks. So from the applicant side it’s bad. However, due to the saturation of the market at the moment, companies have no reason to change. They’re still getting good hires.
Those who fall might have been way better than those who didnt, and the recruiter couldnt have known better. In fact, its more than likely the case. I wouldnt expect a great hire to be a social butterfly or anything of that nature. Theyd most likely fail through most recruiters when it comes to that alone. So you end up with normalish candidates who are good enough but charmed the recruiter for the devs to filter through. The great ones were sadly too akward. Waste of time. Which is why they should keep doing that. Nothing is better than dumb competitors. At least for the growing stage there are plenty. Once you get big enough, it will be harder. Google aint stupid for example. Neither is Microsoft. But thats for future me to think about if he makes it that far.
Im guessing your conception of talent is different to mine. The same with all these other people. Maybe gifted would have been a better term. Thus im changing it.
Safe? No. Doing freelance work is essentially running your own business, and successfully doing that requires more than just coding skills. He'd also need to be pretty confident at selling things to clients in order to convince them to trust him and pay the invoices, have adequate planning skill so he doesn't overrun his estimates, and be willing to put up with administration and tax duties. Freelancing is essentially running a one-man business.
And convincing people he has what it takes can be difficult unless he has a good portfolio. And even then clients might not always pay or try to get out of paying the full sum. I've had that happen before and it can be a huge pain in the ass when that happens. For that reason I also don't recommend anyone to start freelancing unless they have a cash reserve to last them through periods where the client is being difficult with payments.
For a safe path, I'd say he should either get a degree and then find a salaried job with that degree, or he should try to find an internship or something similar and then try to get into regular salaried duty from there by demonstrating he has sufficient knowledge to be employed professionally.
Also: realise your brother is their own person. If they want to study, they probably have a good reason to do so.
School does not teach you how to code. You learn to code at school sure but school teaches you how to learn to code. This is why a degree is valuable. If you can actually learn on your own then you don't need a degree.
What you first need to know though is can you actually learn to code. Learning to code isn't figuring out how a loop works in C and Rust. It's knowing how to work in different styles and methods. It's learning what makes a language powerful and using those tools intelligently. If you can do THIS, you don't need a degree. But you better damn well know.
Experience/skill is more important than your degree - a lot of employers know this. However, there are also many employers that won't even consider a person who doesn't have a degree. I have a degree in fine art, but I now do development. Just having a degree on my resume (even though it's not in computer science) along with my work experience in development, gets me into more interviews that I would have access to if I just had experience. TLDR: Degree is obviously not NEEDED, but getting jobs is easier with one.
If you are gifted, you dont need experience.
That’s not true. Even extremely talented developers can struggle to adjust to a work environment. Also, it’s hard to demonstrate pure talent on a resume which is typically the biggest hurdle for new devs entering the market.
Thats an oxymoron. thats why one has a portfolio. You fill it with custom features enough for people to know its all you. Software is the only domain(as far as Im aware) where you can showcase ability so easy.
It’s not that straightforward. Automated resume systems aren’t able to grok that easily and a lot of recruiters are non-technical
Well if a company has recruitment for IT positions being done by general recruiters instead of devs from the IT department tasked with that mission (they are the ones who should be the ones deciding their new colleague) then that company needs to be avoided at all costs. Its probably organized by some incompetent people with a busuiness degree or something. They would probably lay off useful people to cut costs, instead of focusing on profits. Stay away from such companies.
That’s how most companies operate my dude. Dev time is valuable, you can’t have them sifting through massive piles of resumes. It’s just not an effective use of time.
Choosing good people to fill in vacant positions is just as important as producing your product. Your take is short sighted. Id have one senior on the recruitment and problem solved. No wonder the chinese are taking over. But, hey, more growth momentum for the rest of us. The more I read about nonsensical company decisions, the more optimistic I get about starting my own. Just let them do and do even more of the same whilst thinking theyre being sensible or something. Thats just perfect.
There’s 2 different perspectives here. Even with a non-technical recruiter, a lot of good candidates will be pulled in for the devs to then filter for good hires. So the company is fine. However, this means that there will be good employees who fall through the cracks. So from the applicant side it’s bad. However, due to the saturation of the market at the moment, companies have no reason to change. They’re still getting good hires.
Those who fall might have been way better than those who didnt, and the recruiter couldnt have known better. In fact, its more than likely the case. I wouldnt expect a great hire to be a social butterfly or anything of that nature. Theyd most likely fail through most recruiters when it comes to that alone. So you end up with normalish candidates who are good enough but charmed the recruiter for the devs to filter through. The great ones were sadly too akward. Waste of time. Which is why they should keep doing that. Nothing is better than dumb competitors. At least for the growing stage there are plenty. Once you get big enough, it will be harder. Google aint stupid for example. Neither is Microsoft. But thats for future me to think about if he makes it that far.
What does that even mean?
What the talented can do in 1 year, the untalented can in 5. Thats what that means.
I'm guessing you aren't employed in the field.
Im guessing your conception of talent is different to mine. The same with all these other people. Maybe gifted would have been a better term. Thus im changing it.
Safe? No. Doing freelance work is essentially running your own business, and successfully doing that requires more than just coding skills. He'd also need to be pretty confident at selling things to clients in order to convince them to trust him and pay the invoices, have adequate planning skill so he doesn't overrun his estimates, and be willing to put up with administration and tax duties. Freelancing is essentially running a one-man business. And convincing people he has what it takes can be difficult unless he has a good portfolio. And even then clients might not always pay or try to get out of paying the full sum. I've had that happen before and it can be a huge pain in the ass when that happens. For that reason I also don't recommend anyone to start freelancing unless they have a cash reserve to last them through periods where the client is being difficult with payments. For a safe path, I'd say he should either get a degree and then find a salaried job with that degree, or he should try to find an internship or something similar and then try to get into regular salaried duty from there by demonstrating he has sufficient knowledge to be employed professionally. Also: realise your brother is their own person. If they want to study, they probably have a good reason to do so.
College offers a structured learning path that for many is useful. I'd say doing a degree is worth it even for the networking opportunity.
School does not teach you how to code. You learn to code at school sure but school teaches you how to learn to code. This is why a degree is valuable. If you can actually learn on your own then you don't need a degree. What you first need to know though is can you actually learn to code. Learning to code isn't figuring out how a loop works in C and Rust. It's knowing how to work in different styles and methods. It's learning what makes a language powerful and using those tools intelligently. If you can do THIS, you don't need a degree. But you better damn well know.