Doxxing is bad. I don’t care if the person is a murderer or a protestor. Doxxing can have many, very nasty unintended consequences that can hurt more than just the person being doxxed.
I’m with you, while the people doing the bad things deserve to be found out by their friends, family, employers, etc…The means that this discovery happens matters and doxxing is not ok, full stop.
Great question! Initially, I was 100% against doxxing because it turns into vigilante justice when people gang up on a suspect that hasn’t been properly tried in a court, so innocent people could become victims for something they didn’t do or pay excessive consequences. However, with your question, I think it points out some nuance.
In the case of the Jan 6 insurrectionists, the FBI was trying to find them to press charges, so I think it was appropriate to doxx them. Protesters that didn’t partake directly in the insurrection were also outed and I’m iffy on that one. Their presence still had an impact on the insurrection because it gave energy to the thing and possible increased intimidation. Imagine if there was 1 person outside your house with a guillotine vs 100 people with a guillotine. The latter would likely instill more fear.
Ultimately, I think the main issue is not with being doxxed, but with the vigilante justice that people like to enact when someone is doxxed. Rather than say firing this dentist, the people that had the power to do so could have just accepted that the dentist had his own opinion on the matter irrelevant to his employment and left it at that. Yet, they acted on the desire to punish him by firing him. I think that’s messed up because for all we know, he might have had a valid reason for that behavior or at the very least, it was not affecting his work. I think it’s normal to be frustrated with the situation and have emotional responses to it. Rather than punish and isolate him, they could have had a compassionate talk with him to hear him out and possibly come to a collaborative stance to help ameliorate the situation. After all, conflicts aren’t resolved by increasing antagonism. It’s resolved by engaging in understanding and healthy interdependence. If anything, all they did was further radicalize the dentist.
That’s a pretty fair response. Although I would say that I am against doxxing people who just happened to show up and didn’t actually enter the capital/participate in any illegal behavior. You can’t predict what the crowd will do and I think we would all agree it’s wrong if a BLM protest got out of hand and they decided to punish everyone who was there simply because they “increased intimidation”.
My background: staff level eng at a moderately large company with experience in both tiny scale (12 man) and massive @Google (that January layoff was so great 🫠), 7YOE in Android + 2 in iOS dev
Getting your first 2-3 years of experience under your belt makes finding jobs much easier in the future: no companies want to hire juniors and train them but most companies are looking for seniors.
Whichever software stack you start on will tend to improve your chances of getting better jobs in that sector and it’s hard to leave golden handcuffs as you get more and more experience in a field.
Were I in your shoes: I’d take the job at (shot in the dark here) Chase Bank over the job through Insight any day. I’ve loved every contractor I’ve worked with but the companies see you as an expendable resource to cut as soon as possible.
What matters most for you is years in the field. Job experience. Skills and technical experience comes from time working on projects more than anything else.
When it comes time to exit Chase Bank be sure you’ve got your algos down and your soft skills on point. Being charming in an interview is as important as your algorithmic knowledge, for better or worse. If you’re charming, have 2-3 YOE and ace your technical questions you’ll be in good shape to move into realms you find more interesting.
Tell the tech company about the offer from the finance company. Ask them if they can match it (knowing full well they probably won’t, but ask anyway). If they say no, ask if they can go any higher than the stated offer. Whatever they tell you, tell them you’ll think on it and get back to them this week.
Then do whatever you want. I’d go for the one with the more relaxed dress code, personally.
Just because OP doesn’t like it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, nor does it change the question of what to do when they don’t have said indicators. All OP asked was “why don’t they have indicators.” These are reasons why. The other reasons are greed and laziness.
I’ve worked with people who worked in software for the (property) insurance industry, which is similarly conservative and not tech oriented.
The advantage is that it tends to be extremely stable.
Like you can probably work there your entire life if you wanted, and they have a career path that accounts for that.
The downside is that you’re probably going to hate every minute of it. You won’t be doing anything that could be considered innovative. Doesn’t mean it won’t do anything that would fit on a resume or that it’s a dead end, it just won’t be new.
Personally, I would recommend the more interesting job. 27 isn’t an age I would worry about either.
If I could go back to 27 I’d take the interesting job. I’ve done both but waited until my late 30s to really spread my wings. I did a whole bunch of cool things that I wish I had done 10 years earlier so that I wouldn’t mind settling into a more boring thing later.
Insight global is an alright company if you go the contracting route. They were one of the few that would actually get involved when there were issues with the client.
Contracting is tough right now with the limited options and the very volatile market, at least in the US. I’m about to be unemployed at the end of November unless I can find something.
Financial institutions are very regulated and it is usually a pretty solid job to have - I did 5 years at JPMC and 2 at Huntington. But beware they’ll fuck you over if you ever refuse to toe the line or want an actual work life balance.
I’m only 3.5 years post college, my advice might not be the most sage. I’d take whichever you think you’ll enjoy most in the moment, and it sounds like the contract. You should ask them about possibilities for “contract to hire”, though. A lot of places like to do that anyway. From my experience, the contract work will look better on a resume and help a lot more for finding a new job in 1-5 years, and your skills won’t stagnate. I took some more stable jobs in my own career, but that’s mostly because I think of coding strictly as a job and less of a hobby, and I’m happier with a stable paycheck, but a less challenging, engaging, and exciting job.
But if you’re in a position where it is very important for you to have 100% of your income and a guarantee of work in 7 months, maybe take the more stable one. Like if you have kids or family that you’re supporting. But if you’re thrifty and good at interviewing (which it sounds like you are), sometimes contracts can actually be better financially in the long run, just more work. It really depends on the jobs and your attitudes towards them. But nothing is ever set in stone for your career path, as long as you can learn new things and show them off. If you decide on the financial group but are still worried, I’d recommend just having a side project your working on in a personal, non-work-affiliated github and just keep up on trends with that.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.