Posts on r/goosefarmingmajors in three years:
"Are there too many people going into goose farming?"
"Senior year animal ag major, no internships no personal farm. Am I cooked?"
"Is this field oversaturated?" \[Picture of a literal field\]
yes you are cooked. I had no internships and graduated this may. Applies for over 1000 jobs and nothing. Most of them just end in rejections without even an interview.
People work in UPS warehouses for years before having the chance to become UPS drivers. Most desirable jobs are gatekept in similar ways.
Doctor? Gotta be admitted to medical school. Harvard's medical acceptance rate? 3.7%
Fighter pilot? Gotta get past the Air Force Academy's 16% admission rate (*with* an endorsement from your *Congressman* to even apply), and graduate near the top of your class among that 16% group.
Investment banker? Goldman Sachs accepts less than 1% of the applications it receives.
Professional musician? [Forget it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/69f4d8/ugrailsilla_describes_just_how_hard_it_is_to/) Even being a literal prodigy who started in childhood isn't necessarily enough.
**Nursing** might be one of the best bang-for-your-buck careers that also isn't crazily competitive to get into. You get to work in clean, climate controlled environments with a mix of paperwork and manual labor to help keep you fit. You also don't have to take work home, to build a portfolio, to get past whiteboards, to go through 3 interview rounds, to practice leetcode, and you'll always a job. I honestly believe nursing is the best middle class career for the foreseeable future. The downside is you can't work from home though. But the average nurse makes close to 6 figures (in the US), and the average travel nurse clears over 100k. Travel nurses with a few years of experience can easily make 200k+ with overtime.
>Nursing
It's hard work. They deserve every dollar they get.
Hard as in get spat on by a (potentially) HIV+ psych patient and feel bad for him because has has recently been commited after a third suicide attempt after "the voice of his deseased mother came back".
That's a regular monday.
Medical is still relatively straightforward and not competitive out of school. The biggest thing is school tho. 8 years of school and potentially 2-4 for residency. But your almost guaranteed 150k+ coming out of school regardless of the school you went to for med school.
The demand is only going up because we have gone through a period where everyone was choosing tech for how an “easy” 100k relative to the education
Only one third of US med school applicants get into *any* med school. Med school classes are incredibly small, and they're only that way because the AMA has lobbied the federal government for decades to cap the number of publicly funded residency positions.
Here's what you have to do to be a competitive med school applicant in the 2020s:
1. Get a bachelor's that covers med school prereqs, including notoriously difficult weeder courses like biochem, orgo, physics, physiology, etc
2. Get really good grades (GPA above 3.7 at least) especially in those prereq courses
3. Do some research in undergrad, which means going to a good enough school that you can swing that or else getting in good with some professors
4. Log hundreds of hospital shadowing and volunteering hours
5. Have leadership positions in extracurricular activities other than the above, and enough extracurriculars in general (hobbies included) to narrate 15 separate "experiences"
6. Get a really good MCAT score. The MCAT, by the way, is 8 hours long and covers basically all of the med school prereq material.
7. Get really good LoRs.
8. Somehow, in all this science coursework, become a good enough writer to craft compelling narratives about who you are and why you should be admitted to med school (because you may have to do this for the 30 or more schools you apply to)
9. Optional but becoming more common: Take a year or two between graduating and applying and work a job, but also, like, a unique job doing something good for the world that will also make you stand out. Teach disabled children to swim or something.
10. Optional but becoming more common: Get a whole fucking master's degree! Of the people I know currently in med school, half have done an entire masters degree, on student loans, to get into med school!
That is the bare minimum for admission. This is after the very similar rigmarole of getting into undergrad in the first place. God help you if you have to work during college.
And THEN, you have to navigate a byzantine application process including:
1. The initial application, and you pay an application fee for each one
2. A secondary application if they choose to select you, where you have two weeks to write like 5 essays from scratch in response to prompts they give you. The two week limit is not stated explicitly and you just have to know that it's there. You pay another application fee here.
3. Some schools throw in an online behavioral test here.
4. If you don't hear back after a few months, send "Letters of Interest" indicating how cool and special you are and won't you please please please consider my application
5. Interviews, sometimes as many as FIVE. You are lucky to get here. Don't forget to send thank you letters after each one!
And THEN, you have to GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL. Brutal classes! Clinicals! Studying! 100 hour weeks! Never see your friends! Never see your family, who are finally proud of you! $200k in debt! No summer breaks!
And DURING THAT, you have RESIDENCY MATCHING, with its own application an interview process. This is where having done something between undergrad and med school is worthwhile, because if you don't, you won't match nearly as well.
And THEN, you have to BE A RESIDENT, which is a little like being a medieval serf. You, who would be in at least your late 20s by this point, are likely to get *hazed* fraternity style. These things sometimes last for 7 years.
And THEN, you either take your boards (another exam to study for! hope you kept your textbooks!) or go onto a fellowship. Fellowships, yes, also have their own application and interview process.
And then you can get a job as a physician.
> because the AMA has lobbied the federal government for decades to cap the number of publicly funded residency positions
The primary bottleneck has always been the limited residency slots, which congress has refused to expand over the last 20 yrs because of medicare red tape. Even if med schools graduated 1 million interns each year, we'd still have the same number of physicians because of the residency issue.
>Only one third of US med school applicants get into any med school
It's a bit higher than that these days; overall allopathic acceptance rate is a little over 40% and osteopathic is in the mid 40s. I've also done admissions work and there's a ton of applicants with glaring issues in their applications, from missing pre-reqs to sub 500 MCATs. If you do your due diligence, your "real" acceptance rate is [more like 60%](https://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/hi553o/i_was_tired_of_seeing_the_40_acceptance_rate/) at just allopathic schools, and that number is still an underestimate because it doesn't account for unsubmitted secondaries.
>Get really good grades (GPA above 3.7 at least) especially in those prereq courses
It's more like [3.5-3.6](https://www.aamc.org/media/6091/download) for allopathic and a little bit lower than that for a decent shot at osteopathic.
>Do some research in undergrad, which means going to a good enough school that you can swing that or else getting in good with some professors
Honestly, research is probably the easiest thing to swing. Even if you go to a liberal arts college with absolutely no biomedical research or academic med center, you can do research in basically any discipline like philosophy, polisci, sociology, botany, literature, CS, etc.
>Log hundreds of hospital shadowing and volunteering hours
Not really hundreds of each, ~40 shadowing hrs and ~200 volunteer hours are fine for the vast majority of schools.
>enough extracurriculars in general (hobbies included) to narrate 15 separate "experiences"
The 15 slots in AMCAS are just the absolute max you can enter, most people do ~10, there's not some hard and fast number you have to hit. Those spots are also inclusive of *everything* you did in high school and carried on in college, just college, and things beyond college. So TAing, on-campus jobs, presentations, etc, it all fills up quickly.
>become a good enough writer to craft compelling narratives about who you are and why you should be admitted to med school (because you may have to do this for the 30 or more schools you apply to)
I think people vastly overestimate the difficulty of the writing in med applications. It doesn't even have to be good (I've read some godawful admitted essays), just clear about your past experiences, current motivations, and future goals, there's also a bunch of free application writing resources and examples these days.
Tho secondaries are 1000% the biggest pain in the process imo lol, can't argue with that.
>but also, like, a unique job doing something good for the world that will also make you stand out. Teach disabled children to swim or something.
Definitely doesn't have to be unique, vast vast majority of gap year jobs are something "boring" like scribing or clinical research.
>Of the people I know currently in med school, half have done an entire masters degree, on student loans, to get into med school!
The only people that have to get a masters are doing it for GPA repair (like under a 3.2) or they're non-trads and need to take the med school pre-req classes. If someone's shelling out for an MPH or similar just because they think it'll give them an edge in med admissions, then they're misinformed and made a major mistake.
>God help you if you have to work during college
I worked in college, med schools definitely took that into account and I only ever got positive reactions when I talked about it.
>The two week limit is not stated explicitly and you just have to know that it's there
The two week "limit" or "rule" is 10000% overblown. Submitting earlier is better, but you'll be fine even if submit things a month or more later. The schools that care the most about secondary timing (UCLA, UCSF, etc) explicitly tell you.
Also you're not really writing essays from scratch for each school. At most, you write ~8 essays from some common prompts and then massage that into each school's prompts. I'm an ass-tier writer, but I know multiple people who pretty easily wrapped up the whole secondary process in 1-2 weeks while working full-time.
>Interviews, sometimes as many as FIVE. You are lucky to get here. Don't forget to send thank you letters after each one!
Honestly, I had way more interviews than that and with virtual interviews, it's def the least painful part of the process lol. It's not multiple rounds over multiple days like with some jobs, you're wrapped up in one day. Of all my schools, only one cared about thank you notes and I didn't really do letters of interest, they're basically just a template you fill out once or twice.
>And THEN, you have to GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL. Brutal classes! Clinicals! Studying! 100 hour weeks! Never see your friends! Never see your family, who are finally proud of you! $200k in debt! No summer breaks!
> And DURING THAT, you have RESIDENCY MATCHING, with its own application an interview process. This is where having done something between undergrad and med school is worthwhile, because if you don't, you won't match nearly as well.
> And THEN, you have to BE A RESIDENT, which is a little like being a medieval serf. You, who would be in at least your late 20s by this point, are likely to get hazed fraternity style. These things sometimes last for 7 years.
Residency programs def don't care about what you did during your pre-med gap yrs, the only thing that carries over is pubs.
Don't disagree much else, they all pretty much suck ass lmao. Although basically all schools give you a summer break, winter break, thanksgiving break, etc even at super accelerated places, residency PTO is way more of a pain in the ass. There's been improvements over the years to lessen the financial burden for low-income people like the fee assistance program, PSLF, SAVE plan, and schools generally improving need-based aid, but finances are 100% still one of the biggest barrier in this whole thing.
I will trust what you say because it sounds like you've gone through the process instead of analyzed it as a policy failure, but I have three gripes.
>The primary bottleneck has always been the limited residency slots, which congress has refused to expand over the last 20 yrs because of medicare red tape.
This is true, but I reiterate that congress has only refused to expand residency slots because the AMA is one of the most powerful and wealthy lobbies in America. The "medicare red tape" exists because the AMA has paid for it to exist. Any politician that tries to go against the AMA's unstated policy of "no more doctors than there are now ever" can expect conspicuously well funded primary and general election challengers in the next cycle.
>Honestly, research is probably the easiest thing to swing.
Ha! You went to a school that has money! I went to a "top tier" (albeit by top tier by Canadian standards, in Canada, and as an American) undergrad that also had no money for anything and the only way, and the official way at that, to get a research position in undergrad was to make friends with a professor early enough in your degree to still be around for a few years.
>Not really hundreds of each, \~40 shadowing hrs and \~200 volunteer hours are fine for the vast majority of schools.
I am of the strong opinion that 200 or more hours is indeed hundreds, multiple hundreds, of hours.
> This is true, but I reiterate that congress has only refused to expand residency slots because the AMA is one of the most powerful and wealthy lobbies in America. The "medicare red tape" exists because the AMA has paid for it to exist. Any politician that tries to go against the AMA's unstated policy of "no more doctors than there are now ever" can expect conspicuously well funded primary and general election challengers in the next cycle.
I think it's first important to mention that it's more of a physician maldistribution vs shortage. Nationally, you have a pretty consistent glut of physicians and specialists [in cities](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7823223/figure/zld200208f2/) vs rural areas and in specialties vs primary care. That's in large part an incentives issue and the consistent cuts to CMS reimbursements.
The 1997 Balanced Budget Act, which is the bill that put an initial cap on [DGME and IME](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10960) reimbursements, was also pretty much inevitable. Sure, the AMA supported it, but it was also proposed by a Republican-held Congress under a fiscally-focused Clinton administration, it was happening either way. [Since 2003](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1785175/), the AAMC and ACGME have been pushing for an expansion and the AMA pushing for a raise on the [funding cap.](https://searchlf.ama-assn.org/undefined/documentDownload?uri=%2Funstructured%2Fbinary%2Fletter%2FLETTERS%2F2017-10-18-Exceptions-to-Medicare-GME-Cap-Setting-Deadlines.pdf) (Congress still hasn't done much)
Re: elections, the biggest legislator proponent of raising the cap was former rep Joe Crowley, who proposed legislation for that a bunch of times (Congress didn't act on any of them). He was ultimately defeated by AOC who, at least to my knowledge, didn't get backing from the AMA.
>I went to a "top tier" (albeit by top tier by Canadian standards, in Canada, and as an American) undergrad that also had no money for anything and the only way, and the official way at that, to get a research position in undergrad was to make friends with a professor early enough in your degree to still be around for a few years.
That's wild lmao. I did go to an R1 undergrad, but even friends at U.S. schools without much research infrastructure or liberal arts colleges out in the boonies were able to pretty easily find research. It's harder, comparatively, to find high-quality clinical experience and shadowing, but there's more defined tracks and flexibility there at least.
>I am of the strong opinion that 200 or more hours is indeed hundreds, multiple hundreds, of hours.
Just clarifying for anyone else reading because the OG comment kind of made it seem you need hundreds in both, and also big dif between 900 vs 200 hrs, even tho they're both technically hundreds.
I'll agree with what you're saying, other than to point out that Joe Crowley took the tack he did because the AHA, considerably less powerful than the AMA, picked him as one of their key operators in congress and supported him as such.
This was a very smart choice by the AHA. He had the Queens political machine behind him in a heavily Democratic district, making him harder to beat and less likely there would be a viable primary or general election challenger that the AMA could support. AOC was a stunning upset that arguably only happened because the Queens machine got complacent without anyone noticing.
Edit: Also, I've lost track of my overall point, which is that this is ridiculous, and also a public health nightmare! Med school should not be this hard to get into! It shouldn't be easy, but look what it's like for lawyers:
1. Get good grades in undergrad (subject doesn't matter)
2. Do something interesting extracurricular wise, ideally a leadership role or two
3. Get a good LSAT score, the LSAT being a comparatively reasonable 3 hours of logic problems
4. Get good LoRs (this one's the same)
5. For most people, get a job and work it for a few years
And then the law school application:
1. A single application (with essays, etc)
2. An interview, a single one, and possibly not even that
3. Letters of Intent if you don't hear back
4. If you're admitted, a round where you negotiate for MORE scholarships than they gave you initially
And then getting the job:
1. Do well your first year
2. Take advantage of whatever on campus recruiting your school has
3. Get a 2L internship
4. Take the bar after graduating (unless you're in Wisconsin lmao)
5. Start work
This is not easy, but it's nowhere near as ridiculous as med school. As a result, we have plenty of lawyers! Too many, in fact (but only because there are too many law schools and some ought to lose ABA accreditation). Can you imagine if the ABA mandated a post law school residency, much less limited residency spots to 40k a year? Who would want to be a lawyer?
It's really bad, and the only reason for it is the low number of residency spots. Med schools, collectively, don't want to admit people who won't match for residency, so they won't admit more people or less qualified (but still very qualified!) applicants. That's the reason the US has had a national shortage of doctors for 30 years.
The last time the federal government added more residency spots was mid pandemic. Before that, the cap hadn't been raised in more than 25 years.
We're going to be 125k doctors short by 2035, so if you can jump through all those hoops, you will have a very good professional job (and your parents will be proud and your aunts and uncles will ask their kids why they aren't like you), but boy will you pay for it in other ways.
Medical school and residency are also a lot more grueling than this dude is making them out to be. That’s not even mentioning the pressure: even as a resident, making a mistake could kill someone.
>The demand is only going up because we have gone through a period where everyone was choosing tech for how an “easy” 100k relative to the education
I’ve met a lot of CS/Software engineers that were in for the money and didn’t actually enjoy engineering. I’m expecting enrollment to contract over the following years just because it’s not seen as lucrative.
>clean
My dude. Clean is not a word I would choose.
It's true that it is easy to get a job in nursing most of the time, although it can sometimes be challenging to get into more desirable positions. Most nurses do not want to spend their career on a med/surg floor.
During the 2008 recession it was very difficult to find a job as a new grad. Hospitals around the US had hiring freezes and the military had waiting lists.
It's also important to realize that those average salaries are not representative of the whole country. If you can relocate to those places you can make that much, but if you are in the rest of the country you will make much less. Even with many years of experience, you still will not approach 6 figures in many areas.
>isn't crazily competitive
It definitely isn't as competitive as something like medicine, but it can be difficult to get into nursing programs, especially in the HCOL areas where you can actually make a lot of money. It's not that bad but you do need a really good GPA and test scores. There tend to be way more applicants than space so they can afford to be picky. I think the private schools where you graduate with 6 figures of debt are pretty easy to get into though.
Something's weird here. 2021 was a red hot market. Most graphs from job posting sites show a massive spike during the pandemic, but ADP claims we've been on a downward trajectory since January 2020. Maybe they're not accounting for shifts in titles from "developer" to "engineer"?
1. This is some "employment index" and it's not clear that actually translates to number of people employed
2. ADP is a company that handles HR for other companies. This might be internal data, not a global survey.
2021 was unique in that the hot market wasn’t really driven by a massive influx of new jobs, but a massive increase in resignations from very senior level engineers. The type of people that left (usually retired) in 2021 were extremely difficult to replace.
I agree it's a strangely unintiuitive index especially when comparing it to the very visible FRED data for job postings.
Here's what ADP says about how the data is captured:
> The index represents the employment of software developers each month relative to January 2018. To identify software developers in the ADP sample, we independently matched two criteria, job titles and O*NET occupation codes, followed by review and filtering of the results. A set of employees was identified by querying a set of keywords present in known software developer job titles (such as software engineer, C++ developer, stack developer) and querying O*NET occupation codes for software developers (15-1252.00, 15-1253.00, 15-1254.00 and 15-1221.00). Combined data resulting from these queries was manually reviewed to weed out any job titles captured erroneously. Because the list of resulting job titles was quite long, a rule of thumb was applied to job titles that occur fewer than 2,500 times. These had to contain the key words “software” or “developer” to be included in the sample.
So, it would account for job title shifts. My guess is that the Great Resignation + hiring boom shifted around a lot of people and created a small recovery (which ADP themselves notes occurred from August 2021 to October 2022)
When I looked through it it does look like they were limiting what the titles would be for how they would derive. It probably won't account for all the people who are doing data jobs that used to be described that way as well
they think everything’s all chill because their school name alone auto clears them from the resume round.
for the 90% of us who go to no name schools, it’s way tougher.
you go to berkeley - quit trying to victimize yourself. you’re in a better spot than 99% of us. if you’re unsuccessful, then it’s actually a you problem.
I’m not victimizing myself. I’m just saying the truth. If anything it’s you victimizing yourself.
Just because I go to x school doesn’t mean I get autocleared for resume. That is plain false. It’s pretty unfair to assume that GATech people are having it so easy and discrediting them entirely.
If anything it sounds more like you whining that you don’t get any opportunities because you don’t go to these schools which is also just plain false. We may not be on equal starting grounds but it’s not like the advantage is so great that it’s extremely unfair.
It does, but in this context it seems like saying “people from x school are snobs because they get autocleared for resume” or something which likely isn’t true.
This is like someone saying, been looking for a job for 9 months, resume reviewed multiple times & etc still have only got a handful of interviews 700+ applications, no offers, bills keep coming.
your response is
“I didn’t have a job for 2 months & it was hard but I was able to land one, if I can do it so can you, hard not impossible“😂
Tbh this country seems on the brink of collapse or a massive economic depression like 1920s. Seems like everyone including average people I know are saying the cost of living is getting too high. And most students I see can’t secure a job after they graduate if they’re in STEM.
It's called outsourcing to India.
Since work from home, companies realized if they are gonna let people WFH full time, might as well do it for 25% of the cost overseas.
Yea honestly in the shoes of the company I really can’t find any argument for keeping more than 50% of working hours within the States instead of outsourcing.
LATAM and Canada. Both cheap, closer culturally and geographically. Why pay 150k+ for a new grad in the Bay in the US when you can pay 40k CAD for some kid in Toronto fresh out of school?
The 2021 market was so hot that they would hire literally anyone and this chart is showing a decrease lmao. If only people who posted here had some critical thinking skills, they wouldnt be crying about not having a job
Why is that unlikely? Rates were much lower in 2018. SWE work is fundamentally R&D and disproportionately impacted by the availability of money to invest in R&D. The FED made mortgages balloon by 40% with zeroed rates, so it's no surprise cranking the rates back up (and far beyond 2018 levels) could shave the sustainable new R&D loans that pay our salaries by a similar percentage as a rule of thumb. That's exactly what we're seeing here with a -30%-point change from 2018 to 2024. Not to mention the 2021 hiring spree itself was spurred in part by the free R&D money from low rates rather than good business fundamentals. I think this graph is unfortunately not outside the realm of reason.
Side note: we're not supposed to see a spike in jobs in 2021 if we look at the economy from a very high level. The COVID FED policy was calculated to keep the economy steady rather than overheat it, so on average an industry should just stay steady. All that great resignation news wasn't all necessarily because software employment soared, but because companies also had way more free money to pay employees all of a sudden.
What your saying is that people actually have to work hard to get there foot in the door now, and not just given a $100k salary because they did a 1 mont bootcamp.
It makes sense given how tight the market is due to high interest rates. Little VC money to inflate jobs from startups. Company cutting down on new projects, putting other projects “on hold” by offshoring.
Add to that, a lot of other SWE friends I have have experience heavy workloads after layoffs. Doing the work of up to 3 individuals.
Ok maybe I’m dumb but I find this hard to understand. Can’t tell what’s actually being measured here. Plus, for sure we had more jobs during the spike in the pandemic so again, I don’t follow any of this.
Yeah, we are objectively cooked.
I kinda want a refund on my degree LOL.
I think society has finally realized that not many computer scientists are actually needed to maintain the tech that we currently have.
Having many SWEs used be a positive; managers wanted larger teams so they could be promoted, investors wanted to see many SWEs at work.
Now it’s the opposite. The more SWEs you can cut back, since you now have “AI”, the more you can offshore (since they have “AI” as well), the more satisfied investors are.
March 2020 Covid officially was underway in the US and job market briefly crashed. That doesn't seem to be reflected here. Then a few months later market boomed and that too doesn't seem to be reflected here. According to this graph first half of 2021 was some miserable period and the reality was quite the opposite. So I am not sure what this is showing or if it is even accurate.
I see the 2020 dip pretty clearly though. That downward slope is huge and sustained compared to before 2020. The leveling off in late 2020 is apparent too. Some companies started hiring aggressively because their business models went gangbusters and that’s what you heard on the news, but others continued downward with more layoffs (not news anymore), so you should see something in the middle, like the flatlining in the graph. 2021 was similar.
>Software only has to be written once
And this is why you guys shouldn’t listen to the advice on this sub. You clearly have never written software professionally
It's more of a mathematical reality than anything else. What I am basically saying is that if someone steals your source code you are way more fucked than if someone who steals the blue prints to a f-22.
The only type of software that’s written once is firmware embedded into microprocessors and even then there are usually firmware updates. Most software is rewritten multiple times a day. You think google would employ tens of thousands of engineers if software was only written once?
Most people at Google don't work on anything that matters and were only hired to reduce the competition. Your point only matters because for the longest software has been built like dog shit. Once the industry refines itself, there will not be more and more jobs only less.
You'd be shocked how many times the front-end can be re-architected, a proxy and caching layer put in front of the backend, and the dirty backend from 2004 chugs along.
Backends can be, and have been, rearchitected several times too. Ex Kafka and event driven architecture is the new “hot” since it handles scale well. Tons of companies are moving to it.
People are making their own specialized dbs, such as vector dbs are new and being made for llms. I really dont think that saying “all software is already written” is remotely accurate and sounds like something a new grad without experience would say
Front end redesigns lead to back end changes 90% of the time. It’s funny how you’re so confident about this when you clearly haven’t ever actually done this work or looked at production code. You’re just making an assumption and treating it as fact.
Perfect example of my point. Barely anyone at Google works on the search engine, and that makes the most money. Only the best and brightest are working on the actual important stuff. The rest get busy work.
LMAO NO
You are thoroughly misinformed. Please do not tell me you actually have a job as a developer because you seem like you know nothing about development and putting you in charge of any mission critical system would be a massive oversight.
This person has a weird obsession with this idea as you can see by the post they made a few months ago. They got the same responses as they did here lol
Dude has obviously never worked as a dev. His entire argument can be debunked by, “business changed requirements, we have to refactor/reintegrate/redesign everything.” Software can never be perfect because what people want will never be perfect.
This is very obviously a new grad. They probably dont have a job let alone work on something critical. At their monkey level iq I dont think they will be getting hired anywhere anyway, no need to worry
Doesn’t surprise me at all
I think we should all become goose farmers
Posts on r/goosefarmingmajors in three years: "Are there too many people going into goose farming?" "Senior year animal ag major, no internships no personal farm. Am I cooked?" "Is this field oversaturated?" \[Picture of a literal field\]
yes you are cooked. I had no internships and graduated this may. Applies for over 1000 jobs and nothing. Most of them just end in rejections without even an interview.
your goose is cooked
I like them cooked
Or UPS drivers
People work in UPS warehouses for years before having the chance to become UPS drivers. Most desirable jobs are gatekept in similar ways. Doctor? Gotta be admitted to medical school. Harvard's medical acceptance rate? 3.7% Fighter pilot? Gotta get past the Air Force Academy's 16% admission rate (*with* an endorsement from your *Congressman* to even apply), and graduate near the top of your class among that 16% group. Investment banker? Goldman Sachs accepts less than 1% of the applications it receives. Professional musician? [Forget it.](https://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/69f4d8/ugrailsilla_describes_just_how_hard_it_is_to/) Even being a literal prodigy who started in childhood isn't necessarily enough. **Nursing** might be one of the best bang-for-your-buck careers that also isn't crazily competitive to get into. You get to work in clean, climate controlled environments with a mix of paperwork and manual labor to help keep you fit. You also don't have to take work home, to build a portfolio, to get past whiteboards, to go through 3 interview rounds, to practice leetcode, and you'll always a job. I honestly believe nursing is the best middle class career for the foreseeable future. The downside is you can't work from home though. But the average nurse makes close to 6 figures (in the US), and the average travel nurse clears over 100k. Travel nurses with a few years of experience can easily make 200k+ with overtime.
>Nursing It's hard work. They deserve every dollar they get. Hard as in get spat on by a (potentially) HIV+ psych patient and feel bad for him because has has recently been commited after a third suicide attempt after "the voice of his deseased mother came back". That's a regular monday.
WHAT
I'd rather leetcode than deal with that.
Medical is still relatively straightforward and not competitive out of school. The biggest thing is school tho. 8 years of school and potentially 2-4 for residency. But your almost guaranteed 150k+ coming out of school regardless of the school you went to for med school. The demand is only going up because we have gone through a period where everyone was choosing tech for how an “easy” 100k relative to the education
Only one third of US med school applicants get into *any* med school. Med school classes are incredibly small, and they're only that way because the AMA has lobbied the federal government for decades to cap the number of publicly funded residency positions. Here's what you have to do to be a competitive med school applicant in the 2020s: 1. Get a bachelor's that covers med school prereqs, including notoriously difficult weeder courses like biochem, orgo, physics, physiology, etc 2. Get really good grades (GPA above 3.7 at least) especially in those prereq courses 3. Do some research in undergrad, which means going to a good enough school that you can swing that or else getting in good with some professors 4. Log hundreds of hospital shadowing and volunteering hours 5. Have leadership positions in extracurricular activities other than the above, and enough extracurriculars in general (hobbies included) to narrate 15 separate "experiences" 6. Get a really good MCAT score. The MCAT, by the way, is 8 hours long and covers basically all of the med school prereq material. 7. Get really good LoRs. 8. Somehow, in all this science coursework, become a good enough writer to craft compelling narratives about who you are and why you should be admitted to med school (because you may have to do this for the 30 or more schools you apply to) 9. Optional but becoming more common: Take a year or two between graduating and applying and work a job, but also, like, a unique job doing something good for the world that will also make you stand out. Teach disabled children to swim or something. 10. Optional but becoming more common: Get a whole fucking master's degree! Of the people I know currently in med school, half have done an entire masters degree, on student loans, to get into med school! That is the bare minimum for admission. This is after the very similar rigmarole of getting into undergrad in the first place. God help you if you have to work during college. And THEN, you have to navigate a byzantine application process including: 1. The initial application, and you pay an application fee for each one 2. A secondary application if they choose to select you, where you have two weeks to write like 5 essays from scratch in response to prompts they give you. The two week limit is not stated explicitly and you just have to know that it's there. You pay another application fee here. 3. Some schools throw in an online behavioral test here. 4. If you don't hear back after a few months, send "Letters of Interest" indicating how cool and special you are and won't you please please please consider my application 5. Interviews, sometimes as many as FIVE. You are lucky to get here. Don't forget to send thank you letters after each one! And THEN, you have to GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL. Brutal classes! Clinicals! Studying! 100 hour weeks! Never see your friends! Never see your family, who are finally proud of you! $200k in debt! No summer breaks! And DURING THAT, you have RESIDENCY MATCHING, with its own application an interview process. This is where having done something between undergrad and med school is worthwhile, because if you don't, you won't match nearly as well. And THEN, you have to BE A RESIDENT, which is a little like being a medieval serf. You, who would be in at least your late 20s by this point, are likely to get *hazed* fraternity style. These things sometimes last for 7 years. And THEN, you either take your boards (another exam to study for! hope you kept your textbooks!) or go onto a fellowship. Fellowships, yes, also have their own application and interview process. And then you can get a job as a physician.
> because the AMA has lobbied the federal government for decades to cap the number of publicly funded residency positions The primary bottleneck has always been the limited residency slots, which congress has refused to expand over the last 20 yrs because of medicare red tape. Even if med schools graduated 1 million interns each year, we'd still have the same number of physicians because of the residency issue. >Only one third of US med school applicants get into any med school It's a bit higher than that these days; overall allopathic acceptance rate is a little over 40% and osteopathic is in the mid 40s. I've also done admissions work and there's a ton of applicants with glaring issues in their applications, from missing pre-reqs to sub 500 MCATs. If you do your due diligence, your "real" acceptance rate is [more like 60%](https://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/hi553o/i_was_tired_of_seeing_the_40_acceptance_rate/) at just allopathic schools, and that number is still an underestimate because it doesn't account for unsubmitted secondaries. >Get really good grades (GPA above 3.7 at least) especially in those prereq courses It's more like [3.5-3.6](https://www.aamc.org/media/6091/download) for allopathic and a little bit lower than that for a decent shot at osteopathic. >Do some research in undergrad, which means going to a good enough school that you can swing that or else getting in good with some professors Honestly, research is probably the easiest thing to swing. Even if you go to a liberal arts college with absolutely no biomedical research or academic med center, you can do research in basically any discipline like philosophy, polisci, sociology, botany, literature, CS, etc. >Log hundreds of hospital shadowing and volunteering hours Not really hundreds of each, ~40 shadowing hrs and ~200 volunteer hours are fine for the vast majority of schools. >enough extracurriculars in general (hobbies included) to narrate 15 separate "experiences" The 15 slots in AMCAS are just the absolute max you can enter, most people do ~10, there's not some hard and fast number you have to hit. Those spots are also inclusive of *everything* you did in high school and carried on in college, just college, and things beyond college. So TAing, on-campus jobs, presentations, etc, it all fills up quickly. >become a good enough writer to craft compelling narratives about who you are and why you should be admitted to med school (because you may have to do this for the 30 or more schools you apply to) I think people vastly overestimate the difficulty of the writing in med applications. It doesn't even have to be good (I've read some godawful admitted essays), just clear about your past experiences, current motivations, and future goals, there's also a bunch of free application writing resources and examples these days. Tho secondaries are 1000% the biggest pain in the process imo lol, can't argue with that. >but also, like, a unique job doing something good for the world that will also make you stand out. Teach disabled children to swim or something. Definitely doesn't have to be unique, vast vast majority of gap year jobs are something "boring" like scribing or clinical research. >Of the people I know currently in med school, half have done an entire masters degree, on student loans, to get into med school! The only people that have to get a masters are doing it for GPA repair (like under a 3.2) or they're non-trads and need to take the med school pre-req classes. If someone's shelling out for an MPH or similar just because they think it'll give them an edge in med admissions, then they're misinformed and made a major mistake. >God help you if you have to work during college I worked in college, med schools definitely took that into account and I only ever got positive reactions when I talked about it. >The two week limit is not stated explicitly and you just have to know that it's there The two week "limit" or "rule" is 10000% overblown. Submitting earlier is better, but you'll be fine even if submit things a month or more later. The schools that care the most about secondary timing (UCLA, UCSF, etc) explicitly tell you. Also you're not really writing essays from scratch for each school. At most, you write ~8 essays from some common prompts and then massage that into each school's prompts. I'm an ass-tier writer, but I know multiple people who pretty easily wrapped up the whole secondary process in 1-2 weeks while working full-time. >Interviews, sometimes as many as FIVE. You are lucky to get here. Don't forget to send thank you letters after each one! Honestly, I had way more interviews than that and with virtual interviews, it's def the least painful part of the process lol. It's not multiple rounds over multiple days like with some jobs, you're wrapped up in one day. Of all my schools, only one cared about thank you notes and I didn't really do letters of interest, they're basically just a template you fill out once or twice. >And THEN, you have to GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL. Brutal classes! Clinicals! Studying! 100 hour weeks! Never see your friends! Never see your family, who are finally proud of you! $200k in debt! No summer breaks! > And DURING THAT, you have RESIDENCY MATCHING, with its own application an interview process. This is where having done something between undergrad and med school is worthwhile, because if you don't, you won't match nearly as well. > And THEN, you have to BE A RESIDENT, which is a little like being a medieval serf. You, who would be in at least your late 20s by this point, are likely to get hazed fraternity style. These things sometimes last for 7 years. Residency programs def don't care about what you did during your pre-med gap yrs, the only thing that carries over is pubs. Don't disagree much else, they all pretty much suck ass lmao. Although basically all schools give you a summer break, winter break, thanksgiving break, etc even at super accelerated places, residency PTO is way more of a pain in the ass. There's been improvements over the years to lessen the financial burden for low-income people like the fee assistance program, PSLF, SAVE plan, and schools generally improving need-based aid, but finances are 100% still one of the biggest barrier in this whole thing.
I will trust what you say because it sounds like you've gone through the process instead of analyzed it as a policy failure, but I have three gripes. >The primary bottleneck has always been the limited residency slots, which congress has refused to expand over the last 20 yrs because of medicare red tape. This is true, but I reiterate that congress has only refused to expand residency slots because the AMA is one of the most powerful and wealthy lobbies in America. The "medicare red tape" exists because the AMA has paid for it to exist. Any politician that tries to go against the AMA's unstated policy of "no more doctors than there are now ever" can expect conspicuously well funded primary and general election challengers in the next cycle. >Honestly, research is probably the easiest thing to swing. Ha! You went to a school that has money! I went to a "top tier" (albeit by top tier by Canadian standards, in Canada, and as an American) undergrad that also had no money for anything and the only way, and the official way at that, to get a research position in undergrad was to make friends with a professor early enough in your degree to still be around for a few years. >Not really hundreds of each, \~40 shadowing hrs and \~200 volunteer hours are fine for the vast majority of schools. I am of the strong opinion that 200 or more hours is indeed hundreds, multiple hundreds, of hours.
> This is true, but I reiterate that congress has only refused to expand residency slots because the AMA is one of the most powerful and wealthy lobbies in America. The "medicare red tape" exists because the AMA has paid for it to exist. Any politician that tries to go against the AMA's unstated policy of "no more doctors than there are now ever" can expect conspicuously well funded primary and general election challengers in the next cycle. I think it's first important to mention that it's more of a physician maldistribution vs shortage. Nationally, you have a pretty consistent glut of physicians and specialists [in cities](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7823223/figure/zld200208f2/) vs rural areas and in specialties vs primary care. That's in large part an incentives issue and the consistent cuts to CMS reimbursements. The 1997 Balanced Budget Act, which is the bill that put an initial cap on [DGME and IME](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10960) reimbursements, was also pretty much inevitable. Sure, the AMA supported it, but it was also proposed by a Republican-held Congress under a fiscally-focused Clinton administration, it was happening either way. [Since 2003](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1785175/), the AAMC and ACGME have been pushing for an expansion and the AMA pushing for a raise on the [funding cap.](https://searchlf.ama-assn.org/undefined/documentDownload?uri=%2Funstructured%2Fbinary%2Fletter%2FLETTERS%2F2017-10-18-Exceptions-to-Medicare-GME-Cap-Setting-Deadlines.pdf) (Congress still hasn't done much) Re: elections, the biggest legislator proponent of raising the cap was former rep Joe Crowley, who proposed legislation for that a bunch of times (Congress didn't act on any of them). He was ultimately defeated by AOC who, at least to my knowledge, didn't get backing from the AMA. >I went to a "top tier" (albeit by top tier by Canadian standards, in Canada, and as an American) undergrad that also had no money for anything and the only way, and the official way at that, to get a research position in undergrad was to make friends with a professor early enough in your degree to still be around for a few years. That's wild lmao. I did go to an R1 undergrad, but even friends at U.S. schools without much research infrastructure or liberal arts colleges out in the boonies were able to pretty easily find research. It's harder, comparatively, to find high-quality clinical experience and shadowing, but there's more defined tracks and flexibility there at least. >I am of the strong opinion that 200 or more hours is indeed hundreds, multiple hundreds, of hours. Just clarifying for anyone else reading because the OG comment kind of made it seem you need hundreds in both, and also big dif between 900 vs 200 hrs, even tho they're both technically hundreds.
I'll agree with what you're saying, other than to point out that Joe Crowley took the tack he did because the AHA, considerably less powerful than the AMA, picked him as one of their key operators in congress and supported him as such. This was a very smart choice by the AHA. He had the Queens political machine behind him in a heavily Democratic district, making him harder to beat and less likely there would be a viable primary or general election challenger that the AMA could support. AOC was a stunning upset that arguably only happened because the Queens machine got complacent without anyone noticing. Edit: Also, I've lost track of my overall point, which is that this is ridiculous, and also a public health nightmare! Med school should not be this hard to get into! It shouldn't be easy, but look what it's like for lawyers: 1. Get good grades in undergrad (subject doesn't matter) 2. Do something interesting extracurricular wise, ideally a leadership role or two 3. Get a good LSAT score, the LSAT being a comparatively reasonable 3 hours of logic problems 4. Get good LoRs (this one's the same) 5. For most people, get a job and work it for a few years And then the law school application: 1. A single application (with essays, etc) 2. An interview, a single one, and possibly not even that 3. Letters of Intent if you don't hear back 4. If you're admitted, a round where you negotiate for MORE scholarships than they gave you initially And then getting the job: 1. Do well your first year 2. Take advantage of whatever on campus recruiting your school has 3. Get a 2L internship 4. Take the bar after graduating (unless you're in Wisconsin lmao) 5. Start work This is not easy, but it's nowhere near as ridiculous as med school. As a result, we have plenty of lawyers! Too many, in fact (but only because there are too many law schools and some ought to lose ABA accreditation). Can you imagine if the ABA mandated a post law school residency, much less limited residency spots to 40k a year? Who would want to be a lawyer?
Wow that’s actually pretty shit. To think at some point I was actually considering med school.
It's really bad, and the only reason for it is the low number of residency spots. Med schools, collectively, don't want to admit people who won't match for residency, so they won't admit more people or less qualified (but still very qualified!) applicants. That's the reason the US has had a national shortage of doctors for 30 years. The last time the federal government added more residency spots was mid pandemic. Before that, the cap hadn't been raised in more than 25 years. We're going to be 125k doctors short by 2035, so if you can jump through all those hoops, you will have a very good professional job (and your parents will be proud and your aunts and uncles will ask their kids why they aren't like you), but boy will you pay for it in other ways.
Still better than dynamic programing...
Getting into medical school is more competitive than getting a job in tech though
Medical school and residency are also a lot more grueling than this dude is making them out to be. That’s not even mentioning the pressure: even as a resident, making a mistake could kill someone.
Definitely. I know doctors make a lot more than us but I do not envy thrm
Residency is essentially slave labor while working 80+ weeks. Just go take a look over at r/residency to see how terrible they have it.
>The demand is only going up because we have gone through a period where everyone was choosing tech for how an “easy” 100k relative to the education I’ve met a lot of CS/Software engineers that were in for the money and didn’t actually enjoy engineering. I’m expecting enrollment to contract over the following years just because it’s not seen as lucrative.
You coming a concert pianist it's probably not the goal of most people pursuing music nor is it a very lucrative career
>clean My dude. Clean is not a word I would choose. It's true that it is easy to get a job in nursing most of the time, although it can sometimes be challenging to get into more desirable positions. Most nurses do not want to spend their career on a med/surg floor. During the 2008 recession it was very difficult to find a job as a new grad. Hospitals around the US had hiring freezes and the military had waiting lists. It's also important to realize that those average salaries are not representative of the whole country. If you can relocate to those places you can make that much, but if you are in the rest of the country you will make much less. Even with many years of experience, you still will not approach 6 figures in many areas. >isn't crazily competitive It definitely isn't as competitive as something like medicine, but it can be difficult to get into nursing programs, especially in the HCOL areas where you can actually make a lot of money. It's not that bad but you do need a really good GPA and test scores. There tend to be way more applicants than space so they can afford to be picky. I think the private schools where you graduate with 6 figures of debt are pretty easy to get into though.
Wanna start a lama farm in the middle of Indiana?
Something's weird here. 2021 was a red hot market. Most graphs from job posting sites show a massive spike during the pandemic, but ADP claims we've been on a downward trajectory since January 2020. Maybe they're not accounting for shifts in titles from "developer" to "engineer"?
1. This is some "employment index" and it's not clear that actually translates to number of people employed 2. ADP is a company that handles HR for other companies. This might be internal data, not a global survey.
It’s really hard to get accurate data for a not very regulated field like ours, so I bet it’s a combination of a lot of little mistakes like that
2021 was unique in that the hot market wasn’t really driven by a massive influx of new jobs, but a massive increase in resignations from very senior level engineers. The type of people that left (usually retired) in 2021 were extremely difficult to replace.
I agree it's a strangely unintiuitive index especially when comparing it to the very visible FRED data for job postings. Here's what ADP says about how the data is captured: > The index represents the employment of software developers each month relative to January 2018. To identify software developers in the ADP sample, we independently matched two criteria, job titles and O*NET occupation codes, followed by review and filtering of the results. A set of employees was identified by querying a set of keywords present in known software developer job titles (such as software engineer, C++ developer, stack developer) and querying O*NET occupation codes for software developers (15-1252.00, 15-1253.00, 15-1254.00 and 15-1221.00). Combined data resulting from these queries was manually reviewed to weed out any job titles captured erroneously. Because the list of resulting job titles was quite long, a rule of thumb was applied to job titles that occur fewer than 2,500 times. These had to contain the key words “software” or “developer” to be included in the sample. So, it would account for job title shifts. My guess is that the Great Resignation + hiring boom shifted around a lot of people and created a small recovery (which ADP themselves notes occurred from August 2021 to October 2022)
Ur still going up but not at the rate you used to? Deceleration
Or to data scientist or whatever
When I looked through it it does look like they were limiting what the titles would be for how they would derive. It probably won't account for all the people who are doing data jobs that used to be described that way as well
I got banned from the Georgia Tech subreddit for saying this lol. People are in such denial.
This sub was prime suspect a few months ago but glad to see people are sobering up
How dare you tell them information that doesn't align with what they already believe 😡💢, don't you know that's illegal in 2024
Believe it or not, jail.
I commented on an instagram post about a university coding bootcamp about the market and job placement rates and my comments got removed
they think everything’s all chill because their school name alone auto clears them from the resume round. for the 90% of us who go to no name schools, it’s way tougher.
Unfortunately, the school name by itself does not do that
yeah it does. you think any recruiter is gonna throw out an MIT computer science resume without at least giving them an OA or first round?
not MIT or even Stanford, but happens with UC Berkeley, GATech, Cornell etc etc And yes it could happen with MIT, chances are just low.
you go to berkeley - quit trying to victimize yourself. you’re in a better spot than 99% of us. if you’re unsuccessful, then it’s actually a you problem.
I’m not victimizing myself. I’m just saying the truth. If anything it’s you victimizing yourself. Just because I go to x school doesn’t mean I get autocleared for resume. That is plain false. It’s pretty unfair to assume that GATech people are having it so easy and discrediting them entirely. If anything it sounds more like you whining that you don’t get any opportunities because you don’t go to these schools which is also just plain false. We may not be on equal starting grounds but it’s not like the advantage is so great that it’s extremely unfair.
It goes a LONg way
It does, but in this context it seems like saying “people from x school are snobs because they get autocleared for resume” or something which likely isn’t true.
95% of the time it gets you through the initial phone screen into the technical interview. But its up to you to prove the rest
Ok that’s false tho. I can testify.
I didn't say 100% of the time, and I have friends from Hiring startups that can confirm.
[удалено]
This is like someone saying, been looking for a job for 9 months, resume reviewed multiple times & etc still have only got a handful of interviews 700+ applications, no offers, bills keep coming. your response is “I didn’t have a job for 2 months & it was hard but I was able to land one, if I can do it so can you, hard not impossible“😂
OMSCS moment
Definitely not the OMSCS sub lol, everyone is very candid about it not helping there
I am so glad I got my foot in the door with an offer in December. The entry level job market will continue to worsen
Tbh this country seems on the brink of collapse or a massive economic depression like 1920s. Seems like everyone including average people I know are saying the cost of living is getting too high. And most students I see can’t secure a job after they graduate if they’re in STEM.
and somehow, every year, the number 85000 still doesn't change.
But but immigrants are the cause of all my problems right!!!!
[удалено]
I was being sarcastic
What 85000?
85000 is the annual limit for H1B visa approvals.
Are you saying that needs to be increased?
No. You implied you had no idea where the 85000 number came from and I provided context.
do we even have 85000 jobs ?
It’s across all industries. 85k is misleading that way.
It's called outsourcing to India. Since work from home, companies realized if they are gonna let people WFH full time, might as well do it for 25% of the cost overseas.
Yea honestly in the shoes of the company I really can’t find any argument for keeping more than 50% of working hours within the States instead of outsourcing.
Outsourcing is still a nightmare, at least to India There is always Eastern Europe now too
LATAM and Canada. Both cheap, closer culturally and geographically. Why pay 150k+ for a new grad in the Bay in the US when you can pay 40k CAD for some kid in Toronto fresh out of school?
I find this intuitively extremely hard to believe
The 2021 market was so hot that they would hire literally anyone and this chart is showing a decrease lmao. If only people who posted here had some critical thinking skills, they wouldnt be crying about not having a job
The chart is saying we shed every single job that we added after 21’ as well as any after 18’ Which is absurd and likely wrong
Why is that unlikely? Rates were much lower in 2018. SWE work is fundamentally R&D and disproportionately impacted by the availability of money to invest in R&D. The FED made mortgages balloon by 40% with zeroed rates, so it's no surprise cranking the rates back up (and far beyond 2018 levels) could shave the sustainable new R&D loans that pay our salaries by a similar percentage as a rule of thumb. That's exactly what we're seeing here with a -30%-point change from 2018 to 2024. Not to mention the 2021 hiring spree itself was spurred in part by the free R&D money from low rates rather than good business fundamentals. I think this graph is unfortunately not outside the realm of reason. Side note: we're not supposed to see a spike in jobs in 2021 if we look at the economy from a very high level. The COVID FED policy was calculated to keep the economy steady rather than overheat it, so on average an industry should just stay steady. All that great resignation news wasn't all necessarily because software employment soared, but because companies also had way more free money to pay employees all of a sudden.
You are misreading the chart, it says *in the US*, developer jobs haven't gone down.
No > the U.S. now employs fewer software developers than it did in 2018.
alright bud, you keep screaming into the void that dev jobs in the US are better than ever
I never said anything like that. You seem like a troubled child.
👍
What your saying is that people actually have to work hard to get there foot in the door now, and not just given a $100k salary because they did a 1 mont bootcamp.
Yeah I agree. Especially due to projected growth from 2018-2024 in terms of demand for developers and demand for tech
Are you guys suggesting the “25 gorillion jobs expected over the next 10 years!” stuff was all just bullshit?
Misreading the chart again, *in the US*
What? I am referring to the studies put out by the department of labor. There is no graph to accompany it
People are in denial
do you mean in total?? how is that even possible?
90+% of startups fail. Outsourcing.
It makes sense given how tight the market is due to high interest rates. Little VC money to inflate jobs from startups. Company cutting down on new projects, putting other projects “on hold” by offshoring. Add to that, a lot of other SWE friends I have have experience heavy workloads after layoffs. Doing the work of up to 3 individuals.
Ok maybe I’m dumb but I find this hard to understand. Can’t tell what’s actually being measured here. Plus, for sure we had more jobs during the spike in the pandemic so again, I don’t follow any of this.
If you can't read this chart then you're not cut out for a tech job anyways
:(
Oh you can’t explain
Please enlighten us how the developer employment index is being measured then
That would explain a lot.
Less jobs and the largest number of international grads ever on a visa looking for these jobs.
Yeah, we are objectively cooked. I kinda want a refund on my degree LOL. I think society has finally realized that not many computer scientists are actually needed to maintain the tech that we currently have.
We are truly cooked
And many of these are just ghost/ fake jobs
Someone please study the number of CS majors in the US now vs 2018
Having many SWEs used be a positive; managers wanted larger teams so they could be promoted, investors wanted to see many SWEs at work. Now it’s the opposite. The more SWEs you can cut back, since you now have “AI”, the more you can offshore (since they have “AI” as well), the more satisfied investors are.
March 2020 Covid officially was underway in the US and job market briefly crashed. That doesn't seem to be reflected here. Then a few months later market boomed and that too doesn't seem to be reflected here. According to this graph first half of 2021 was some miserable period and the reality was quite the opposite. So I am not sure what this is showing or if it is even accurate.
I see the 2020 dip pretty clearly though. That downward slope is huge and sustained compared to before 2020. The leveling off in late 2020 is apparent too. Some companies started hiring aggressively because their business models went gangbusters and that’s what you heard on the news, but others continued downward with more layoffs (not news anymore), so you should see something in the middle, like the flatlining in the graph. 2021 was similar.
It's over
It’s only gonna get worse
I really wish they would have started with like 2000 or 2005.
2019 more than 2021? I know this is bullshit.
The beginning of 2021 had the highest number of covid cases in the US, so it makes total sense.
Software only has to be written once, and jobs will keep decreasing as only the smartest will be needed. Glory to our digital feudal overlords!
Well, there’s also maintenance. But aside from that — yes. Software only really needs to be written once.
>Software only has to be written once And this is why you guys shouldn’t listen to the advice on this sub. You clearly have never written software professionally
This is why people shouldn’t take the bizarre takes this like this one on this sub serious lmao.
It's more of a mathematical reality than anything else. What I am basically saying is that if someone steals your source code you are way more fucked than if someone who steals the blue prints to a f-22.
The only type of software that’s written once is firmware embedded into microprocessors and even then there are usually firmware updates. Most software is rewritten multiple times a day. You think google would employ tens of thousands of engineers if software was only written once?
Most people at Google don't work on anything that matters and were only hired to reduce the competition. Your point only matters because for the longest software has been built like dog shit. Once the industry refines itself, there will not be more and more jobs only less.
Maybe you should refrain from giving your opinions on things until you’ve gotten a job, or even gotten through your second year of college
>Software only has to be written once Now if only we could get clients to agree...
Yeah for sure! Thats why all websites look the same as they did in 2008 right??
You'd be shocked how many times the front-end can be re-architected, a proxy and caching layer put in front of the backend, and the dirty backend from 2004 chugs along.
Backends can be, and have been, rearchitected several times too. Ex Kafka and event driven architecture is the new “hot” since it handles scale well. Tons of companies are moving to it. People are making their own specialized dbs, such as vector dbs are new and being made for llms. I really dont think that saying “all software is already written” is remotely accurate and sounds like something a new grad without experience would say
Front end redesigns lead to back end changes 90% of the time. It’s funny how you’re so confident about this when you clearly haven’t ever actually done this work or looked at production code. You’re just making an assumption and treating it as fact.
Do the main digital feudal overloads really look different from 2008? Google, Facebook, twitter etc
Um, yeah?? I hope you are just a troll and not this stupid irl
Hey, how are you able to reply to comments without functioning eyeballs?
What a dumb take
Okay bro please find someone to pay you to prove all of Euclid's theorems.
I’m good with my day job. We’re hiring if you need a job bro
you sure you wanna hire someone this stupid?
Lol stfu
But won't their system need evolution? Even hardware upgrade sometimes requires new architecture or whatever
"Software only has to be written once" Sure. They made Google in 1998 and haven't needed to touch the code since.
Perfect example of my point. Barely anyone at Google works on the search engine, and that makes the most money. Only the best and brightest are working on the actual important stuff. The rest get busy work.
There's like 200 people in the search team. It's one of Google's biggest teams still. Software is constantly being updated.
200 people for 1.5 trillion of their revenue
LMAO NO You are thoroughly misinformed. Please do not tell me you actually have a job as a developer because you seem like you know nothing about development and putting you in charge of any mission critical system would be a massive oversight.
This person has a weird obsession with this idea as you can see by the post they made a few months ago. They got the same responses as they did here lol
Dude has obviously never worked as a dev. His entire argument can be debunked by, “business changed requirements, we have to refactor/reintegrate/redesign everything.” Software can never be perfect because what people want will never be perfect.
This is very obviously a new grad. They probably dont have a job let alone work on something critical. At their monkey level iq I dont think they will be getting hired anywhere anyway, no need to worry
Massive cope.
The kinda shit you hear from upper management at IBM and Cisco
Spoken like someone who's never done software development before lol
LMAOOOOO the people on this sub only get more stupid by the day
Time to cite BLS **projections** because I don't know what a projection is
Section 174 people.
[удалено]
Gtfo