I feel I can relate to this general life story. A lot. While I'm currently only vaguely looking for a job, I also share the same suspicions about general job options for freelancers - although I have to say that I have been extremely lucky in finding work so far. But I agree it sometimes looks like our work isn't very valuable.
In this context I have to say though that the HN freelancer thread, while yielding uneven results, has mostly been very good to me. (YMMV)
The deeper problem as far as the actual hiring process is concerned, however, might be - as hinted at in the article - the amount of work and hoop-jumping necessary just to earn the privilege of showing up for work. I found this astonishing, too, especially given the fact that most programming positions probably have a high turnover rate, and I believe it does have to do with hundreds of applicants showing up for a single position. The ensuing filter process is not only a drain on the applicants, but also on the companies that are paralyzed with making this decision.
I believe the mere existence of TripleByte and SmartHires shows over-supply is a problem, and it's underscored by the fact that they have no problems turning people away.
> there is a shortage of good developers (for various definitions of good).
But couldn't that simply be a result of an inadequate selection process, instigated by a flood of applicants, and then worsened by an inability to judge who will be good in what role? It seems very easy to dismiss anyone looking for work on the grounds that they must not be very good to begin with. All we know is not enough long-term suitable applicants make it to the end of the hiring pipeline.
There are multiple problems we're talking about here.
One is the selection problem, that orgs have great difficulty in working out who is a good developer and who is not.
The other is that there are a lot of developers who have difficulty in getting work, and to a large extent a lot of them just aren't any good and would be better off in a different career (sorry but that's just the way it is).
Once you've removed the rubbish developers there are indeed far more jobs than developers.
> Once you've removed the rubbish developers there are indeed far more jobs than developers.
Agree. And once you add in the big companies like FB, Google, etc... picking up a huge lot of the good+ developers, everyone else is scrambling to find someone who can at a minimum do FizzBuzz.
I don't know, I am certain that the big co's miss a LOT of good developers who just don't fit their interview process. I went through Google's once and got cut off pretty early in the process, and never attempted a large Co's interview process again after that.
I didn't say they got all of the good developers, but they definitely pull a lot of them. For a really good developer it makes sense to at least try to work at one of the companies for awhile. The money is good, and it ends up being a great resume builder. Are there great devs who are passed over or who do not want to work at the big companies? Sure, but the big companies do suck a lot of the talent out of the pool.
In this context I have to say though that the HN freelancer thread, while yielding uneven results, has mostly been very good to me. (YMMV)
The deeper problem as far as the actual hiring process is concerned, however, might be - as hinted at in the article - the amount of work and hoop-jumping necessary just to earn the privilege of showing up for work. I found this astonishing, too, especially given the fact that most programming positions probably have a high turnover rate, and I believe it does have to do with hundreds of applicants showing up for a single position. The ensuing filter process is not only a drain on the applicants, but also on the companies that are paralyzed with making this decision.
I believe the mere existence of TripleByte and SmartHires shows over-supply is a problem, and it's underscored by the fact that they have no problems turning people away.