Religion is never going anywhere, despite your pleas.
And in case you forgot, secularists brought us the most violent conflicts in history, just last century. US slavery didn't need religion, nor did Apartheid. nor climate change or the atomic bomb. Pacifism is pretty much a religious concept, exclusively so until relatively recent human history.
I don't really see how fanatic rationalism has any leg to stand on, really.
> secularists brought us the most violent conflicts in history
They didn't do this 'because of secularism' and that's a big difference. They tried to replace religion with other dogma's en use the religious control for their own purpose. Sure, being a secularist doesn't make you good or non-evil. But without dogmas it will be pretty hard to convince others to blow themselves up for your evil plans.
No one ever committed mass shooting while shouting 'in the name of science', or 'I hate you because I am a securalist.'
Ideologies like Nationalism, Fascism are hardly "religion replacements" but genuine products of the Enlightenment. Nobody forced us to wipe out Native Americans, but there was ample rationalization from the West's most sensitive thinkers.
People HAVE committed and OFTEN commit mass shootings while shouting "For the Fatherland" or some other nationalist/racist slogan. Last I checked the body count is higher.
The only real failure here is that the author gave two years of his life (including holidays) working for the Cheungs. Hopefully he was in his early 20s, otherwise he has no excuse.
Only aspiring middle managers, new grads, and boot campers are available for hire these days. The rock stars have already left the game for greener pastures.
As a person on the wrong side of 30, how can you live with yourself pandering to 20 somethings? I've watched over the years my 40 something coworker do this and it's the most pathetic existence I can think of. It's no surprise he sees a therapist weekly. And yes ladies he's single and ready to mingle.
I'm also happily single and childfree, and a lot of my hobbies are more common among young people. I watch the same movies, TV shows, etc. as people in their teens and twenties. I voraciously read comic books.
I don't expect any of that to ever change. In a decade, I'm going to be consuming the same kind of media in my 40s that I consumed in my 20s and am now consuming in my 30s. Being childfree is never going to change (especially considering I voluntarily sterilized myself), and I'm mentally incapable of feeling romantic attraction to anyone, so I'm going to be single for the rest of my life.
It's not pandering: it's simply be being the kind of person I am, which happens to mean that, on average, I relate more towards people younger than me than to people my age, and that discrepancy is only going to get larger as time goes on (mind you, the "on average" is key because I've met and get along with some fellow outliers, not just my age but also older than me).
I love having freedom. When I say "I'm going to be single for the rest of my life", I don't mean it in a sense of resignation like "aw bummer, I'm going to be single for the rest of my life, this is gonna suck". No, I mean it in the sense of "yay, I'm going to be single for the rest of my life, and it's gonna be so awesome!".
Same with being childfree.
I have the freedom to do anything, go anywhere, and enjoy my life for myself, and I love it.
I'm basically an overgrown kid, with the only difference being that I get paid to take my toys apart, find out how they work, and put them back together in new ways, which I've always done for fun. I love it!
And, hey, my cousins have kids, so I get to be the cool aunt without having to actually spend my life taking care of anyone.
I haven't had a TV since I was a freshman in college and rarely went to movies. It obviously never interfered with my work. Now, after decades of experience, not knowing the latest TV and pop-culture becomes a critical culture fit issue. Interesting extra hurtle in a "meritocracy"
"Being childfree is never going to change (especially considering I voluntarily sterilized myself), and I'm mentally incapable of feeling romantic attraction to anyone,"
Well there you go. Ageism problem solved. Just don't have kids or feelings. JFC
Oh, I have plenty of feelings. I have lots of people I care about and lots of things I feel strongly about. I love spending time with my friends, and I deeply care about their well-being; I just can't feel that particular way about people.
What it boils down to is that I have absolutely zero interest in taking part in any kind of romantic relationship. The idea of having an SO, or worse, living with one, is actively repulsive to me.
The technical term is "aromantic", which I've begun to shy away from using because too many people like to make puns on "aromatic" whenever I say it.
I think there's a difference between "pandering to" and "relating to". The former refers to artificially trying to fit into and build trust with a group, usually with an ulterior motive (e.g. you want their votes). The latter refers to the ability to take yourself out of your own "box" and make an effort to understand them and find some common ground with them.
And guess what: the attitude you demonstrated is the exact same attitude you blame young people for: you're refusing to adapt to them because they don't fit your own age-defined tastes and characteristics.
If a candidate actually had any of those attributes, never mind all seven, they wouldn't be interviewing at your company. Companies need to realize 99% of candidates are B players, and 99% of their own employees are too.
Interviews are not standardized tests. They are closer to a date/sale, than they are to a test. Same answer in an interview is likely to be interpreted differently by different people, very much like you're on a date.
The more you think of interviews like a test, the more you'll agonize about it, and the more you'll feel writing and believing such gospel-ic articles like this. True, there are a few basic common things, but beyond that, it's subjective by definition.
Whoever YOU think fits your values and ideas, is an A player. Everyone else is "B", because they are not exactly "compatible" to your thinking.
At http://InterviewKickstart.com, that's what we find. Every company has a different viewpoint of what a great engineer is. After a generic training for interviews, it's about compatibility with the companies.
My current gig asked me a bunch of questions about tools and techniques... that I am unable to use to do my job.
Suffice it to say that there were some hurt feelings when the contract actually started and I saw how they were actually doing their work. If I knew then what I know now I would have continued looking.
Hmm, this is interesting: I usually share your sentiment when I read articles like this. I think companies are overly obsessed with hiring "the best of the best" and should instead focus on finding great employees, which is a different thing. Having said that, I thought this particular article avoided that trap and enumerated attainable attributes of good employees. As a B-player myself, I believe I (and many others) have nearly all of these attributes, never mind none.
I think the "A-Class" employee idea is a myth. Obviously I've come across individuals who are more talented than others but it's very, very difficult (maybe impossible) to put people in a box.
Would you prefer to work with a genius engineer who is an asshole to deal with or someone with a great personality who takes somewhat longer to learn?
Anybody with actual experience and skills doesn't give a rats ass about your company's mission. And are you seriously asking devs about where they want to be in 5 years? I hope you're not any older than 30.
This is a basic supply/demand problem. I don't see why I'm being downvoted. The exact opposite is happening in Hong Kong. I know many girls who have been trying to get married there with no luck, but the second they end up in SFO they get hitched.
Only desperate people do these tests. I know this first hand because I've been given a handful of them and can never find the motivation to complete them.
