Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

You are hiring an engineer for a project to, say, design a rocket. You're a pretty big and very well coveted company. If any further details matter, we can discuss how they affect the answer.

Lily just graduated from MIT with a perfect academic record. She placed on international coding and mathematics competitions and has been published multiple times in prestigious journals. However, she has no full-time work experience beyond some summer internships at prestigious firms.

John has been an engineer for twenty years. He's a graduate of a decent state school, where he was moderately above average. He's been working at decently well known companies in the aerospace industry, where his coworkers describe him as solid and reliable, but he hasn't done anything mind-blowing.

They're competing for the same six figure salary, and have good social skills. Their work ethics are not directly known to you.

Who do you pick?

We get it you are an arrogant pseudo intellectual teenage pajamaboy who thinks you are superior to the average day americans.

Vomit.

I would hire john any day of the week.

If my company's big and rich enough, I'll take the risk on the new graduate. She could bring something new and innovative to the table that only young, fresh eyes could see. Plus it would give an aspiring and able young person an introductory door to the field. And if she f*cks up I can probably afford to weather it.


Otherwise I'll stick with the industry veteran. Give him a chance and he could very well show himself to have some good ideas based on experience. And if not, at least he's much less likely to make rookie mistakes.

It's all about how rich and powerful my company is, really.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
We get it you are an arrogant pseudo intellectual teenage pajamaboy who thinks you are superior to the average day americans.

Vomit.

I would hire john any day of the week.

lol, so I'm not allowed to make an innocent thread that's not about politics without having you spam it with random insults?

Calm down.


Originally posted by Lord Lucien
If my company's big and rich enough, I'll take the risk on the new graduate. She could bring something new and innovative to the table that only young, fresh eyes could see. Plus it would give an aspiring and able young person an introductory door to the field. And if she f*cks up I can probably afford to weather it.


Otherwise I'll stick with the industry veteran. Give him a chance and he could very well show himself to have some good ideas based on experience. And if not, at least he's much less likely to make rookie mistakes.

It's all about how rich and powerful my company is, really.

That's a fair assessment.

We know who you are talking about, you are basically talking about yourself, but you changed the first person to female to play the feminist identity politics card, you got caught, and failed.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
We know who you are talking about, you are basically talking about yourself, but you changed the first person to female to play the feminist identity politics card, you got caught, and failed.

Let me humor you and assume that you're right (because I can't make a thread about something other than politics); so what? I'm allowed to make a thread on it.

Do you have something to say about the topic?

You got caught,

Lily just graduated from MIT with a perfect academic record. She placed on international coding and mathematics competitions and has been published multiple times in prestigious journals. However, she has no full-time work experience beyond some summer internships at prestigious firms.

^^This is all you have been bragging about for weeks in your personal life.

What's your reasoning for picking John?

Because when the economy collapsed you could not get a job even if you had a degree, the people that got hired and helped get the country back on track were the people with experience. You don't promote newbies and discard your veterans. You hire the new people and let the vets vet them. It will build a better cohesive relationship in a company if you don't side line the people that have been there and been working for you with fresh college students.

There we go.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Because when the economy collapsed you could not get a job even if you had a degree, the people that got hired and helped get the country back on track were the people with experience. You don't promote newbies and discard your veterans. You hire the new people and let the vets vet them. It will build a better cohesive relationship in a company if you don't side line the people that have been there and been working for you with fresh college students.

It likely depends on many more factors though. For example, a tech company like Google would definitely choose Lily; their hiring process places a heavy emphasis on smarts. That's because a lot of Google's work relies on having young people who are a) willing to work long hours, b) up to date technologically, c) open minded and d) intelligent -> innovative and capable of manipulating complex tasks. Meanwhile, other industries that may require less innovation but a lot more industrial knowledge would favor John. Startups would care more about specific skills than a large tech company like Google would, but if it's software, they would definitely pick Lily.

I agree with that. My cousin works for google now, fresh out of college.

I believe you.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
What's your reasoning for picking John?

So wait..was this "Lily" person a thinly veiled description of yourself?

Originally posted by Surtur
So wait..was this "Lily" person a thinly veiled description of yourself?

...no? But I'm not into humoring you pursuing a personal vendetta across threads for derailment's sake. Discuss the subject, or stfu.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
You are hiring an engineer for a project to, say, design a rocket. You're a pretty big and very well coveted company. If any further details matter, we can discuss how they affect the answer.

Lily just graduated from MIT with a perfect academic record. She placed on international coding and mathematics competitions and has been published multiple times in prestigious journals. However, she has no full-time work experience beyond some summer internships at prestigious firms.

John has been an engineer for twenty years. He's a graduate of a decent state school, where he was moderately above average. He's been working at decently well known companies in the aerospace industry, where his coworkers describe him as solid and reliable, but he hasn't done anything mind-blowing.

They're competing for the same six figure salary, and have good social skills. Their work ethics are not directly known to you.

Who do you pick?

If your company is that successful place them in an "unsupervised" limited scope company project for roughly about two week. Tell each it's a trial thing and leave them to their work. Offer little to no supervision. Whoever is the better worker will be shown plainly at the end. Credentials arent everything.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
...no? But I'm not into humoring you pursuing a personal vendetta across threads for derailment's sake. Discuss the subject, or stfu.

Originally posted by Sin I AM
If your company is that successful place them in an "unsupervised" limited scope company project for roughly about two week. Tell each it's a trial thing and leave them to their work. Offer little to no supervision. Whoever is the better worker will be shown plainly at the end. Credentials arent everything.

Yeah that makes sense, although it dodges the thought experiment.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
You are hiring an engineer for a project to, say, design a rocket. You're a pretty big and very well coveted company. If any further details matter, we can discuss how they affect the answer.

Lily just graduated from MIT with a perfect academic record. She placed on international coding and mathematics competitions and has been published multiple times in prestigious journals. However, she has no full-time work experience beyond some summer internships at prestigious firms.

John has been an engineer for twenty years. He's a graduate of a decent state school, where he was moderately above average. He's been working at decently well known companies in the aerospace industry, where his coworkers describe him as solid and reliable, but he hasn't done anything mind-blowing.

They're competing for the same six figure salary, and have good social skills. Their work ethics are not directly known to you.

Who do you pick?


This is an easy decision to make as long as some unknowns are fleshed out a bit better.


Based on the salary you're describing, the position is not entry-level. Hiring Lily for that position is not only inappropriate, it is bad human resource management.

As a hiring manager, you need to be acutely aware of CURRENT statistics which include education trends and employment trends. Placing talent in your open positions has a huge overhead cost especially in the high-skilled/deep-education positions. In one of the jobs I had before, for a particular position for which we had 8 slots, after everything was said and done and all direct and indirect costs were compiled, the average cost to fill each position was $24,000. Twenty Four Thousand Dollars. This was another position that was high-skilled/deep-education. That's quite a bit of money.


What happens if you take a gamble on a fresh college graduate on a not-entry-level position? You can squander quite a bit of money.

So back to why this is just simply bad management:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/05/20/only-27-percent-of-college-grads-have-a-job-related-to-their-major/

"In 2010, only 62 percent of U.S. college graduates had a job that required a college degree.

Second, the authors estimated that just 27 percent of college grads had a job that was closely related to their major."


And that data is outdated. From what I understand, the data is worse and even more lopsided for our young and educated Americans.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-study-shows-careers-and-college-majors-often-dont-match/

And a significant portion of Americans just don't work in a field related to their major.

For STEM majors (relevant to your OP), it is less than half who actually end up working in their field of study:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/most-with-college-stem-degrees-go-to-other-fields-of-work/2014/07/10/9aede466-084d-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html

Add on the other fact that men still make up a very large majority of the STEM major related jobs, and Lily's gender also becomes another variable (why? Because real life gets in the way for many women around that age...especially children, so they fade out of their STEM-related jobs within a few years). BUT WAIT! You say, that's sexism, right? It really is. It really really is.

But that is not everything. If Lily has never ever worked in her entire life at any job before, it would be a solid no from me. If I had an entry level position (it would pay 50-70k a year if it is engineering), I'd consider her for that. But is she did have work experience in ANY job, I'd want multiple references and I would verify actual working relationships. If she got stellar accolades from coworkers and bosses at other jobs, even if it wasn't related to engineering, that would put her very high upon the consideration list. Why? Because I have found that regardless of where a person works, if they put in effort and care about doing a good job, they'll do a good job in just about any position as long as they get the training they need to be successful. The work ethic is what makes a good employee. The onus is on me to train my people to be most successful in their jobs.


But that's not everything! Nope, not at all. Since this is a mid-level engeering job (based on the description you have), I would talk to my other engineering leads and ask them about a common major issue they encounter as it relates to the job. I would prioritize the top 3 and then I would present those scenarios to the top 3. Here's the kicker: 2 out of those 3 would already have been resolved and I would have feedback and lessons learned from those leads about how those were successfully resolved (and how they would do it over again to be even more successful).

When I interview these 2 candidates, I would compare their answers against the real-world scenarios, I would review the candidate answers with the engineering leads, and I would obtain an consensus on an "over-all best fit." All these factors would be weighed to come to a decision.


Usually, the more experienced candidate will be the winner especially for mid-level and above STEM jobs.

Who knows? Perhaps Lily will knock it out of the park.



Anecdote: that's how I get my big break at my last job. The CIO took a risk on me even though I missed the requisite experience required for the job by about 5 years (needed 7, I had 2). I was running up against 2 other decade+ people. The group that interviewed me felt that I just did so much better than the others when I was presented with the scenarios. And the fact that I'm an arrogant bastard who doesn't crumble under public speaking pressure certainly made it easier to get the position.

But how did I REALLY get the position? I knew what the **** I was talking about. That's pretty much the biggest difference.


So what if Lily, in your scenario, shadowed several very seasoned engineers during her college days? What if she gleaned quite a bit of "not- taught-in-school" ideas from those veterans? She may end up having answers that the other engineer doesn't have. Why? Because no one person can know everything. So why not learn from everyone to increase your own ability to adapt and succeed? Why repeat others' mistakes? Why not benefit form others' successes?



Okay, there is your real answer.

This thread is ****ing hilarious!

Lily sounds like she might be an immigrant, so I'm hiring John.

#Trump2016 #bringourjobshome #youhavetogoback

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Lily sounds like she might be an immigrant, so I'm hiring John.

#Trump2016 #bringourjobshome #youhavetogoback
Should Lily go back to China?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Yeah that makes sense, although it dodges the thought experiment.

Just trying to avoid the obvious bait/spam/rage these threads generally inspire. Good topic though 👍

Originally posted by dadudemon
This is an easy decision to make as long as some unknowns are fleshed out a bit better.


Based on the salary you're describing, the position is not entry-level. Hiring Lily for that position is not only inappropriate, it is bad human resource management.

As a hiring manager, you need to be acutely aware of CURRENT statistics which include education trends and employment trends. Placing talent in your open positions has a huge overhead cost especially in the high-skilled/deep-education positions. In one of the jobs I had before, for a particular position for which we had 8 slots, after everything was said and done and all direct and indirect costs were compiled, the average cost to fill each position was $24,000. Twenty Four Thousand Dollars. This was another position that was high-skilled/deep-education. That's quite a bit of money.


What happens if you take a gamble on a fresh college graduate on a not-entry-level position? You can squander quite a bit of money.

So back to why this is just simply bad management:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/05/20/only-27-percent-of-college-grads-have-a-job-related-to-their-major/

"In 2010, only 62 percent of U.S. college graduates had a job that required a college degree.

Second, the authors estimated that just 27 percent of college grads had a job that was closely related to their major."


And that data is outdated. From what I understand, the data is worse and even more lopsided for our young and educated Americans.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-study-shows-careers-and-college-majors-often-dont-match/

And a significant portion of Americans just don't work in a field related to their major.

For STEM majors (relevant to your OP), it is less than half who actually end up working in their field of study:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/most-with-college-stem-degrees-go-to-other-fields-of-work/2014/07/10/9aede466-084d-11e4-bbf1-cc51275e7f8f_story.html

Add on the other fact that men still make up a very large majority of the STEM major related jobs, and Lily's gender also becomes another variable (why? Because real life gets in the way for many women around that age...especially children, so they fade out of their STEM-related jobs within a few years). BUT WAIT! You say, that's sexism, right? It really is. It really really is.

But that is not everything. If Lily has never ever worked in her entire life at any job before, it would be a solid no from me. If I had an entry level position (it would pay 50-70k a year if it is engineering), I'd consider her for that. But is she did have work experience in ANY job, I'd want multiple references and I would verify actual working relationships. If she got stellar accolades from coworkers and bosses at other jobs, even if it wasn't related to engineering, that would put her very high upon the consideration list. Why? Because I have found that regardless of where a person works, if they put in effort and care about doing a good job, they'll do a good job in just about any position as long as they get the training they need to be successful. The work ethic is what makes a good employee. The onus is on me to train my people to be most successful in their jobs.


But that's not everything! Nope, not at all. Since this is a mid-level engeering job (based on the description you have), I would talk to my other engineering leads and ask them about a common major issue they encounter as it relates to the job. I would prioritize the top 3 and then I would present those scenarios to the top 3. Here's the kicker: 2 out of those 3 would already have been resolved and I would have feedback and lessons learned from those leads about how those were successfully resolved (and how they would do it over again to be even more successful).

When I interview these 2 candidates, I would compare their answers against the real-world scenarios, I would review the candidate answers with the engineering leads, and I would obtain an consensus on an "over-all best fit." All these factors would be weighed to come to a decision.


Usually, the more experienced candidate will be the winner especially for mid-level and above STEM jobs.

Who knows? Perhaps Lily will knock it out of the park.



Anecdote: that's how I get my big break at my last job. The CIO took a risk on me even though I missed the requisite experience required for the job by about 5 years (needed 7, I had 2). I was running up against 2 other decade+ people. The group that interviewed me felt that I just did so much better than the others when I was presented with the scenarios. And the fact that I'm an arrogant bastard who doesn't crumble under public speaking pressure certainly made it easier to get the position.

But how did I REALLY get the position? I knew what the **** I was talking about. That's pretty much the biggest difference.


So what if Lily, in your scenario, shadowed several very seasoned engineers during her college days? What if she gleaned quite a bit of "not- taught-in-school" ideas from those veterans? She may end up having answers that the other engineer doesn't have. Why? Because no one person can know everything. So why not learn from everyone to increase your own ability to adapt and succeed? Why repeat others' mistakes? Why not benefit form others' successes?



Okay, there is your real answer.

Entry level engineers can make six figures at the start at places like Google, Exxon, etc. It's hardly clear that this is necessarily a very veteran position. Beyond that, I'll elaborate when I'm on a laptop.

Playing (and possibly supporting) the contrarian:

Originally posted by dadudemon
Based on the salary you're describing, the position is not entry-level. Hiring Lily for that position is not only inappropriate, it is bad human resource management.


As mentioned above, such starting salaries are very common among, for instance, large software and petroleum companies. It's true that it's less frequent in the aerospace sector, but I'm honestly not sure if there's a very rational basis for this discrepancy, and why a company designing rockets couldn't pay smart entry level people lots of money for the same reasons Google and Exxon do.



True, but the potential upside to Lily is also much higher. For one, she likely has more potential than John, so if she stays for a long time, she'll certainly end up producing more. And historically the chances of someone like her producing something truly revolutionary is far greater. If you're a very large company as stipulated in the OP, it's not necessarily the case that 24,000 dollars is too risky for you.



I'm confused. Why is this relevant? You're afraid that she'll leave?



It seems less likely that she'll fade out completely given her particular credentials and very visible ambitions, and many companies now are experimenting ways to get around this, such as offering to freeze eggs or providing on-site childcare.



She's done internships.



Well, put it this way: your answer matches what some companies from certain industries would answer, and is the opposite of what others would. A company like Apple or, more relevantly, SpaceX, would pursue Lily far more vigorously than they would John. That's why their interviews are so geared around identifying intelligent candidates rather than those who have enormous amounts of job-specific expertise. Inexperience has the disadvantages you mentioned, but brilliance at Lily's level can certainly more than compensate. It really depends on a lot of factors, I guess. But in most cases, if you're designing a rocket, you're going more the SpaceX route than the Turning Construction company route.



I think that could be a factor in the interview process, yes, provided that these engineers' responses are themselves reasonable.



It seems like an extremely risk adverse way to select a candidate, which may or may not be a good thing.

With a six figure salary to work with i'd just offer John the job for a slightly higher salary than he's already receiving and use the rest to hire lily to train with him.


If i had to pick one i'd obviously choose, John. The only way i'd hire, Lily is if i owned the company and if no one else was experimenting with similar technology.

I'm hiring John.

I'm hiring John to build me a rocket. Not design one.

The design will be coming from Nasa, The Air Force, The European Space Agency or who-ever it is who wants to out-source and delegate.

Now if I was recruiting for Nasa.

I'd hire Lily.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
A company like Apple or, more relevantly, SpaceX, would pursue Lily far more vigorously than they would John.

Yes and no. For an entry level position specific to her education, perhaps one or more of those you listed would. But you may see the exact opposite as they need experienced engineers who are stable to see a 5+ year project completed and consistency are preferred over cowboy innovations.

Here's another point you need to consider if you want to be an amazing mould-breaking and innovative engineer when you grow up (I hope you do...and remember me when you get to the top, please):

If you appear amazing and you make yourself seem super amazing, you'll be passed over for great jobs because they don't want another cowboy innovator, they want someone who will do their damn job. Know why is that? Oh, that's because they already have their innovators. They don't need yet another person with a huge ego strutting around conflicting ideas on an already established roadmap.

Here's your warning if you want to be a future engineer at a great place: show that you are capable, be humble, and demonstrate that you believe innovation comes in small pieces, not large pieces all at once. You'll be more likely to get hired by that egotistical engineer who may take you under their wing and you'll get amazing opportunities to innovate. Engineers are renowned for having huge egos for a reason. I have first hand experience with engineering majors in college. I had to tutor them in college because they couldn't do some of the physics homework. Nothing is worse in academia than trying to teach someone who thinks they know everything but actually known nothing.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
That's why their interviews are so geared around identifying intelligent candidates rather than those who have enormous amounts of job-specific expertise. Inexperience has the disadvantages you mentioned, but brilliance at Lily's level can certainly more than compensate.

That's incorrect for all the reasons I've pointed out, already. They don't look for intelligence, directly. They actually look for and find people that have won competitions...engineering competitions. That's real world experience (I'm referring to SpaceX). That supposed brilliance can also be part of her weakness. The real world is full of failure after failure after failure. And this can discourage your top-of-the-class people. And as the research suggests, they aren't the innovators.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
It really depends on a lot of factors, I guess. But in most cases, if you're designing a rocket, you're going more the SpaceX route than the Turning Construction company route.

Why...what? Okay, I'll move on because I like your replies. I don't want to cause arguments.


By the way, based on the things you've been posting, you seem to be hinting at SpaceX being the employer you had in mind. More specifically, one of their aerospace engineering jobs. And their engineers? They very experienced ones make $107k-$111k a year. Your starting positions for those students, like Lily, that you described? $64k a year.

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Spacex/Salary



Originally posted by The Ellimist
I think that could be a factor in the interview process, yes, provided that these engineers' responses are themselves reasonable.

Well, if this is SpaceX like you're implying, these are the best of the best. You would have a very hard time getting together a team of engineering leads that could think of better real-world scenarios for interview candidates.


Originally posted by The Ellimist
It seems like an extremely risk adverse way to select a candidate, which may or may not be a good thing.

The opposite is true. I've outlined multiple ways the candidate would be considered are as part of the hiring process, a truly best-fit candidate would be selected. It is always a good thing when considering potential employees. It is a good thing. There is not equal weight, here, as you imply with your "may or may not be a good thing." It is more like, "A very bad decision, almost all of the time, versus a very good decision, most of the time."

To put it better for you, you don't hire newbs into mid-level aerospace engineering jobs. That's just stupid. No matter how amazing they are. Wait until they are a bit more seasoned. Then you'll know for sure that the will be solid and dependable.



Edit - Also, why do the KMC people here give you lots of trouble? What the hell happened? Why are they such dicks to you? I seem to be able to have an argument/debate with you just fine. And you're not coming off as an a**hole when you disagree with me.

If you're only 17, I think you're brilliant and have a great future ahead of you.

Supra gave him a hard time because Ellimist took something Supra told him in confidence (that Supra is not very book smart and is finding it really hard to keep up with fellow students in a class he was taking, and that he had to work much harder to break even with them) and put him on blast on the forum, saying that if Supra is aware that he is unintelligent, then why does he feel he has the right to voice his opinions so strongly?

I can almost guarantee that is what prompted Supra's outburst in this thread.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Supra gave him a hard time because Ellimist took something Supra told him in confidence (that Supra is not very book smart and is finding it really hard to keep up with fellow students in a class he was taking, and that he had to work much harder to break even with them) and put him on blast on the forum, saying that if Supra is aware that he is unintelligent, then why does he feel he has the right to voice his opinions so strongly?

I can almost guarantee that is what prompted Supra's outburst in this thread.

Thanks for explaining.


WTF? That's really what happened?




Don't do that, Ellimist! If you did this, apologize out in the open. Make amends, dude!

Originally posted by The Ellimist
TI, if you struggle so much in school and at work compared to your peers, as you've admitted to me that you do, why do you think you're going to reason better fiscal and social policies?

His first post on the subject.

Now I'm no big fan of Supra, but some would say that airing his dirty laundry and taunting him that you saying you could easily post the PM Supra sent you in confidence to prove it is pretty scummy.

Though some would say that Supra is asking for it.

Originally posted by NemeBro
His first post on the subject.

Now I'm no big fan of Supra, but some would say that airing his dirty laundry and taunting him that you saying you could easily post the PM Supra sent you in confidence to prove it is pretty scummy.

Though some would say that Supra is asking for it.

No matter how heated arguments get, I think you should keep private details revealed in PMs, private.

It's almost like he's an arrogant little shit..

The entry level software engineer at Google averages six figures. Not sure about Exxon, but I personally know someone who did land six figures there straight out of school. I know several other people at these companies who are making well into the six figures starting out - and I've worked with many of them too (not 17), although not yet in a full-time capacity. Note that these are just median salaries - Lily is obviously far above the median prospective employee. I suppose you could say that I didn't say these were software engineers - but I didn't say they weren't either, I left lots of variables open for the sake of the discussion.



It's just TI and Surtur, who are both right-wing members and so disagree with me on practically everything.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No matter how heated arguments get, I think you should keep private details revealed in PMs, private.

It's a little more complicated than that. TI had on multiple occasions gone on harassment campaigns against me, even going over to the Star Wars vs. forum to spam my threads with random insults. He's also instigated racist hate mongering. You know, if you just read a sample of twelve of his posts, you'd get what I'm talking about. So yeah, I don't feel bad, especially given his obsession with Hillary's private emails...

But anyway, not the subject. I might give a more comprehensive reply to your post later.

You're leaving out important details..like if Lily is hot.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
The entry level software engineer at Google averages six figures. Not sure about Exxon, but I personally know someone who did land six figures there straight out of school. I know several other people at these companies who are making well into the six figures starting out - and I've worked with many of them too, although not yet in a full-time capacity. Note that these are just median salaries - Lily is obviously far above the median prospective employee. I suppose you could say that I didn't say these were software engineers - but I didn't say they weren't either, I left lots of variables open for the sake of the discussion.

Entry level jobs require 5 years of experience.

Look, right on Google's site:

https://www.google.com/about/careers/jobs#!t=jo&jid=/google/safety-engineer-hardware-operations-1600-amphitheatre-pkwy-mountain-view-ca-6520005&

"5 years of experience in a related role (i.e. Safety Engineering, Test Engineering, or similar)."

Entry level jobs like these are do not mean "beginner" level. It means it is the lowest level in that career field. It also does not mean it is the lowest paying: their direct manager could make less than them (different responsibilities).

Also, let me be clear that you did specify that she got awards for coding and mathematics so I should have assumed you also intended to include software engineers:

My bad: I was wrong.

But I would like to note that "machine learning" or AI is also listed for what you've cited. That's hardly "right out of college" stuff. That's just bottom of their AI programs.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
It's just TI and Surtur, who are both right-wing members and so disagree with me on practically everything.

Yeah, but, I'm much more a social liberal than you are (I think) and I get along just fine with them. In fact, my liberalness, when it comes to social stuff, makes Hillary look like a conservative warlord in an oppressive theocracy. But they don't give me the shit they give you.



Originally posted by The Ellimist
It's a little more complicated than that.

Well, not really and I will explain why below.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
TI had on multiple occasions gone on harassment campaigns against me, even going over to the Star Wars vs. forum to spam my threads with random insults. He's also instigated racist hate mongering. You know, if you just read a sample of twelve of his posts, you'd get what I'm talking about. So yeah, I don't feel bad, especially given his obsession with Hillary's private emails...

I don't feel that that is appropriate, regardless. If it was a PM, it was a PM. Keep it that way. No matter what he does, do not stoop so low as to do scumbag internet things. No matter how tempting, don't be that guy.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
But anyway, not the subject. I might give a more comprehensive reply to your post later.

Okay but it may not be that necessary since I assumed you meant aerospace engineer (or the usually understood use of "engineer".

It's like this: it's not what he says, it is how he says it.

This is someone who could announce he just cured cancer and make you dislike him by the time he's finished telling you about it.

Originally posted by Surtur
It's like this: it's not what he says, it is how he says it.

This is someone who could announce he just cured cancer and make you dislike him by the time he's finished telling you about it.

What was it about you hating political correctness again?

Oops - it turns out you really just hate liberal minorities. It has nothing to do with wanting open speech at all.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
What was it about you hating political correctness again?

Oops - it turns out you really just hate liberal minorities. It has nothing to do with wanting open speech at all.

Dude, be as politically incorrect as you want. Just don't be an arrogant little shit along the way.

But notice I'm not blocking you or anything like that. I'm not whining and saying you shouldn't be able to say what you say. I am reacting to your words.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Entry level jobs require 5 years of experience.


Not sure if you linked to an entry level position, and it's in safety engineering, which is a more specialized field and, as you could imagine, more risk adverse. An entry software engineer could certainly be straight out of college. To be blunt, this isn't a matter of contention - regardless of whether you think this should happen, there's no question that it does, it happens all the time.



I'm a much more blunt debater than you are, at least when I don't have any serious investment in changing people's minds diplomatically.



Well Astner should get called out for doing the same thing to me, and for TI and Surtur asking him to post the actual message - but regardless, we could have a whole conversation about the ethics of negative reciprocation if you want, just not here. You can PM me if it's really important to you.

Also, so is Lily hot or what? Don't leave a bro hanging.

Originally posted by Surtur
I am reacting to your words.

Yeah, you use my tone as an excuse to not engage me on substance. For all your tough guy macho talk, you get so pissed off when I call you an idiot over the internet.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Yeah, you use my tone as an excuse to not engage me on substance. For all your tough guy macho talk, you get so pissed off when I call you an idiot over the internet.

Oh your tone isn't the reason, he asked why I get along with him better.

So I'm not sure what "macho tough guy" talk I do, because I don't like SJW's and political correctness?

So why is it not political correctness to say that I shouldn't call you an idiot? Is there a "safe space" only around Surtur?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
So why is it not political correctness to say that I shouldn't call you an idiot? Is there a "safe space" only around Surtur?

Damn dude, you pretend to be smart and you say silly things. You can call me whatever you feel like. It doesn't mean I can't point out your smugness. Nor does it mean I can't point out situations of the pot calling the kettle black.

Whatever - I'm not going to discuss this further here.

I'll just say that that calling me "smug" is probably correct, but hardly makes me feel bad.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Whatever - I'm not going to discuss this further here.

I'll just say that that calling me "smug" is probably correct, but hardly makes me feel bad.

A smug person wouldn't really feel bad over being called smug anyways man.

I know.

I'd hire Lily coz in our patriarchy we have it all figured out and running smoothly Gender pay gap FTW!

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Not sure if you linked to an entry level position, and it's in safety engineering, which is a more specialized field and, as you could imagine, more risk adverse. An entry software engineer could certainly be straight out of college. To be blunt, this isn't a matter of contention - regardless of whether you think this should happen, there's no question that it does, it happens all the time.

That's an entry-level position: all positions above that have some sort of management title in it (supervisor, manager, lead, director, etc.)

I'm the opposite: it is up for contention and I hold that it is extremely rare that someone gets a lucky break, like you describe, and gets right into those positions (and almost every time it happens, it is either pure nepotism or borderline nepotism...but as long as they are qualified and can do the job, I'm okay with a dash of nepotism: it is part of the game). If what you said was correct, then those people in those huge "team" shots at SpaceX would have lots of young people who look 20-22. None of them look that young.

I'm really trying to buy what you're selling but I don't see any evidence of it on the internet.


Originally posted by The Ellimist
I'm a much more blunt debater than you are, at least when I don't have any serious investment in changing people's minds diplomatically.

Ho-ho-ho! My young innocent friend...

Well, then, I'll just accept that you seem easy to get along with until proven otherwise. I see shit slinging from all over. But I still think you should apologize for TI for bringing stuff out of the PMs, even if it was taken out of context on purpose to one-up his insults.



Originally posted by The Ellimist
Well Astner should get called out for doing the same thing to me, and for TI and Surtur asking him to post the actual message -

I'm not up-to-date or informed on all the details of this drama. And I'd rather not get into the details. If you think yourself better than these people, be better. Apologize with sincerity. Then don't lower yourself to getting involved with that kind of internet drama. From what they say about you, you probably have a really great future. Right?


Originally posted by The Ellimist
- but regardless, we could have a whole conversation about the ethics of negative reciprocation if you want, just not here. You can PM me if it's really important to you.

Okay, acknowledged but politely rejected. Let's steer away from this particular topic to keep the putrescence to a minimum. If you'd like to respond to me on this particular topic in your thread one more time, please do. But I promise not to post about it, anymore.

I never got a "yay" or "nay" on the hot thing. Just sayin..

I really don't know what to say, Dadudemon. The six figure salary for college grads at Google is something I can personally verify through talking directly with its HR on a professional, contractual capacity, and recent graduate friends who've worked there or at similar places, some from which I've been told exact base salaries (one as high as 140k). There are even interns at Silicon Valley who make the rate of six figures.

And this isn't a unicorn idea - it's common knowledge among everyone in this industry. You are, to be frank, just incredibly ignorant about the subject matter. I don't know if I should bother pulling up the data when you're basically contesting from your gut. You sound as misinformed as someone incredulous that NFL starting quarterbacks can make millions of dollars.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I really don't know what to say, Dadudemon. The six figure salary for college grads at Google is something I can personally verify through talking directly with its HR on a professional, contractual capacity, and recent graduate friends who've worked there or at similar places, some from which I've been told exact base salaries (one as high as 140k). There are even interns at Silicon Valley who make the rate of six figures.

I can also personally un-verify that, too, with direct contacts who were hired for far less than that. This is why they are anecdotes. One-off examples don't really count from either of us.

We can agree that it is rare, yes? How many tops of the tops people can possibly exist during a hiring season? Exactly. And how many of those can land at the top 5 most prestegious places? Exactly. We are dealing with fractions of fractions. Eventually, you end up to where your Lily is just catching a very lucky break (or has a connection). You shouldn't believe this stuff will happen.


Here's a tip: if Lilly can get practical experience working full time while going to school full time, she'll land a job like this. If you want to be Lily, work full time. Don't think you can do it with the workload of school? Too bad. I did it. And I was married at the time with two children.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
And this isn't a unicorn idea - it's common knowledge among everyone in this industry. You are, to be frank, just incredibly ignorant about the subject matter. I don't know if I should bother pulling up the data when you're basically contesting from your gut. You sound as misinformed as someone incredulous that NFL starting quarterbacks can make millions of dollars.

See, I how the same opinion of it as you do of me: I think you're incredibly naive and ignorant of how the real world works. You're clutching onto a pipe dream. I've responded to your thread, given you real no-nonsense advice, and you can choose to ignore if it you'd like. When you hit those walls of failure when you're not within the confines of a comfortably controlled academic world, you'll either listen to my advice or ignore it and spiral into a very sad fall (this happens quite often with prodigies).

If you knew how many of your types I have seen (the ones that have myopic and uncomfortably optimistic world views about how the adult world works), you'd probably get discouraged.


By the way, so many times, I've wanted to tell you how naive and ignorant you are but resisted because it's just plain rude. Since you've opened the door, I can now just respond with a "no you."

I don't know if your absurdly dramatic condescension is trolling or just social cluelessness, but let me simplify this for you in a way you'll understand:

This is not a question of "wisdom" or "life experience". It's literally a factual question of what a company's pay scale is. Your attempt to inject your life experience or dubious wisdom into an issue you could look up in thirty seconds is one of the most awkward appeals to authority I've ever seen. You stroke me as someone who when asked whether its going to rain tomorrow tries to argue with meteorologists by citing your "real world experience" and old folksy wisdom. It's bizarre and cringey.

Since you continue to make shit up despite having never worked in the industry (hint: my real world experience in this area is greater than yours), I'm going to post some more thorough numbers when I get on my computer, from my naive and silly ability to use google.

Edit -


The most I ever paid a "software engineer" was 107k a year without bonus. When I hired her, it was for a manager position: she'd be leading a team. She just so happened to have 20 years of experience. Granted, this was in Oklahoma and locality pay would be adjusted on the coasts for something like this.

And since I even posted the salary range for SpaceX for the job you had in mind for this thread, whose range just so happens to be near the top end for what I'm describing for a different job, that should seal the deal. At this point, I think you're just arguing against me because it is too difficult to admit you are wrong about the pay. You'll make $64K at SpaceX, if that's your career path. I posted the link and everything. Perhaps inflation will raise it to $67K? You know who makes that top end on those jobs? The management who have 20 years of experience.

Horse to water, drink, bla bla bla, good luck.

SpaceX is notorious for underpaying its employees. I was talking about Google.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I don't know if your absurdly dramatic condescension is trolling or just social cluelessness,

Not dramatic at all, but it is condescension of the same caliber that you dished to me. One could even say I was just puppeting your own strategy and so, you have insulted yourself, right?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
but let me simplify this for you in a way you'll understand:

Clueless irony or did you do that on purpose for comedic effect? Regardless, I was amused.




Originally posted by The Ellimist
This is not a question of "wisdom" or "life experience". It's literally a factual question of what a company's pay scale is.

Then the thread is done because I posted it for SpaceX, already and it shows the median is far below your desired 6 figures.


Originally posted by The Ellimist
Your attempt to inject your life experience or dubious wisdom into an issue you could look up in thirty seconds is one of the most awkward appeals to authority I've ever seen.

This is probably you being unintentionally hilariously hypocritical. What about all those people you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, who got hired on immediately making six figures?

I mean...you literally asked us who would you rather hire, right? You asked me for my wisdom. I shot down your expected outcome (as I later found out), and it made you angry. So make fun of the obvious wisdom I've injected into your reality, but it doesn't disappear because you don't like it.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Since you continue to make shit up despite having never worked in the industry (hint: my real world experience in this area is greater than yours), I'm going to post some more thorough numbers when I get on my computer, from my naive and silly ability to use google.

You do that. You pwn those newbz.

But the discussion is over and I've already poured water all over your fire. There's not even smoke coming from your camp, anymore. The tiny fire you thought was a huge bonfire has long since been extinguished days ago. The last vestiges of an argument you thought you had were severed the moment you revealed your SpaceX desires.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
SpaceX is notorious for underpaying its employees. I was talking about Google.

Is this all you can muster in a reply?


http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Google%2c_Inc./Salary/Job/Software-Engineer

About 16% have less than 1 year of experience. Guess which end of the payscale they fall on? The 80K a year end. Guess who falls on the high-end? The ones with ridiculous amounts of experience.



Be honest: do you really really believe you'll graduate and make 6 figures at Google right out of college?


Work while getting your masters. Then it is a much much better chance. Seriously.

Nice attempt to pivot to SpaceX, but if you can show me where in this thread I stated that I wanted to work at SpaceX, I'll eat a bag of raw onions and live-stream it for you. EDIT: rest of paragraph redacted for privacy.

It's common knowledge that even some interns in Silicon Valley pull well into the six figures, with some companies like Snapchat paying almost double the number you threw out. Google, as I showed you earlier, pays its entry level software engineers six figures. Your bizarre attempt to get around this is to cite a job posting that requires five years of experience, except that that wasn't for software engineers. Google hires software engineers full-time straight out of college, which is hardly surprising given that the median age at that companies is the mid-late thirties. The simplest way to buy that this happens is that the majority of college interns end up receiving full-time offers. The number for Facebook is even higher. And if you're going to claim that entry level positions as SWEs require multiple years of experience even though the whole point of SWE internships is for them to return full-time upon graduation, you're gonna have to do some more digging beyond citing a posting for a completely different, far more risk adverse position.

Mind you, this is just base salary, to say nothing of singing bonuses, end of year bonuses and stock options.

Your one saving move is to claim that these are "outlier" salaries. Well, yes and no. They're outlier salaries with respect to the entire programming industry, obviously, but I'm citing average wages within these companies. And in either case, Lily is clearly an outlier case too, firstly because it's defined as such in the OP, and secondly because she's won international coding/math competitions and is at the top of her class at MIT. So looking at the extreme case is hardly unreasonable.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Nice attempt to pivot to SpaceX, but if you can show me where in this thread I stated that I wanted to work at SpaceX, I'll eat a bag of raw onions and live-stream it for you. EDIT: rest of paragraph redacted for privacy.

If you can quote in the thread where I stated that you directly stated that you wanted to work at SpaceX, be my guest.

Also, nice try to try and deflect from SpaceX to another location to help support your already crumbled argument.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
It's common knowledge that even some interns in Silicon Valley pull well into the six figures, with some companies like Snapchat paying bla bla bla

So you're pretending that an extrapolated salary is an actually salary? Nice try, but to the trash with this failed arugment you go. WEEEE!

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Mind you, this is just base salary, to say nothing of singing bonuses, end of year bonuses and stock options.

It literally says it includes that in the very first article you post. Did you even read it? I think not. I think you just google-searched something and posted what you thought supported your arguments.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Your one saving move is to claim that these are "outlier" salaries.

So this is your direct concession. Good. Because I've never said they don't exist. Only that they are extremely rare and usually it's due to knowing someone.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
It's not necessarily the same as Mckinsey; working "60 hours a week" isn't as mandatory or egged on.

Do you see why I think you're naive and in a world of hurt when you enter the adult world?

The answer is it depends entirely on the make up of the team. Lily sounds promising but is she worth a six figure salary right off the bat? Plus are we currently stocked with people of equal accolades or not. Are trying to fill an experience gap it not.

So many different questions would need to be addressed.

Originally posted by dadudemon
So this is your direct concession. Good. Because I've never said they don't exist. Only that they are extremely rare and usually it's due to knowing someone.

I said that they "can" make six figures, and you literally said:



(page 2 of this thread). Your attempt to pivot to claiming they're outliers came later. Also, nice job ignoring (barring an edit) the link that tells you the entry level salary for Google software engineers.

Now, as I just explained, the fact that these salaries are unusual out of all software engineers is hardly relevant, because:

1. As the OP I'm perfectly allowed to come up with hypotheticals that deal with outlier cases.
2. Winning international coding/math competitions like Lily did is also an outlier, a far greater outlier than a six figure starting salary. So she's the type of person that gets headhunted by said companies that pay "outlier" salaries.

So, concession accepted.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you see why I think you're naive and in a world of hurt when you enter the adult world?

It's funny that you try to shift a factual question about starting salaries into personal attacks about my "naivety".

Originally posted by dadudemon
Right, which further rains on the naive ideas that he has. Since he like to extrapolate salaries (rather, he relies on others to do the math), making 107k a year while working 60 work weeks is not an actual six figure salary. It's functionally at 73k a year salary.

Why not work for a government contractor, make about the same, but work 40 hour work weeks? Oh, that's right...one would have to have a better resume.


139k a year? Still not functionally a 6 figure salary.

Nice backtracking. Where did I say it was "functionally" a six figure salary, rather than literally one? A six figure salary is a salary where you make 100,000 dollars or more; I never claimed that this translated into any particular lifestyle. I just said in the OP that the salary was six figures, and now you tried to strawman the position that I thought this was super high despite cost of living, etc.

Please just be a little mature and concede that you f*cked up and talked out of your ass, as a 30 second google search reveals.

Let me remind Dadudemon of how this train of conversation started:

-I say in the OP that the salary is six figures
-He claims this means the position is for a veteran
-I say not necessarily, some companies hire six figures out of college
-He denies this
-When confronted with data showing otherwise, he suddenly claims that I was missing the fact that six figures isn't actually that much given hours, etc.

WTF does the last pivot have to do with anything? If anything, the fact that it's functionally less money is a reason why it's MORE plausible that it could be an entry-level salary, not less.

Yeah, my "naivety" looks good in front of his argumentation skills, which are atrocious.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Nice backtracking. Where did I say it was "functionally" a six figure salary, rather than literally one?

Nice try. Where did I say you said it was functionally a six figure salary?

Seriously, my point went right over your head. Either that or this was a very poor attempt at a strawman.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Please just be a little mature and concede that you f*cked up and talked out of your ass, as a 30 second google search reveals.

No you. I honestly think that's what you did. And since I've called you out on your naive assumptions about the real world, multiple times now, you're upset. Don't be. Of course your ignorant and naive: you have many years to go. One day, you'll look back and say to yourself, "Gosh, I was so ignorant and naive. I knew so very very little. It's embarrassing some of the things I said."

Originally posted by dadudemon
And since I've called you out on your naive assumptions about the real world,

The point of contention here was whether some software engineers make six figures out of school. The context was *not* in the backdrop of how awesome this was or whether it was really all that much given the hours worked or whether it was better to work as a government contractor, etc. It was literally just that. It was you expressing incredulity over the OP's scenario of Lily competing for a six figure salary.

(hint: that the six figures isn't as much as it sounds makes this more plausible)

Despite your recent claims, you originally said that those jobs don't exist (you literally said that, verbatim). Your outlier backtrack came after (and is irrelevant since the OP is an outlier hypothetical anyway).

Astner, and myself, have cited statistics to demonstrate otherwise.

In other words, you lost. The question of whether six figures is a lot of money is separate from the objective question of whether the salary could be six figures, which it could be.

My "naive" assumption happened to be supported by actual data, while your "real world experience" was just an illusory product of your lack of comprehension skills.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Let me remind Dadudemon of how this train of conversation started:

-I say in the OP that the salary is six figures
-He claims this means the position is for a veteran

Who are reminding of this? No one. No one cares about where you screwed up.

Remember the part where in your OP, you have a 20 year veteran applying for the same job and I provided actual evidence that your job can't possibly be describing what you wanted it to be?


You yourself admitted that this job was not a "very veteran" job, which implies that it is somewhat veteran.



Originally posted by The Ellimist
It's hardly clear that this is necessarily a very veteran position. Beyond that, I'll elaborate when I'm on a laptop.


Or did you forget that you indirectly admitted that this wasn't an entry level job?

And when I asked for a single job posting that was an entry level job, any job posting, that required 0 experience, you never provided it.

Where is it? Where's that job posting you are going to apply for?

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I say not necessarily, some companies hire six figures out of college
-He denies this
-When confronted with data showing otherwise, he suddenly claims that I was missing the fact that six figures isn't actually that much given hours, etc.

Ugh. This never happened. This is getting painfully pathetic on your part. You're trying too hard, at this point.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
WTF does the last pivot have to do with anything? If anything, the fact that it's functionally less money is a reason why it's MORE plausible that it could be an entry-level salary, not less.

Yeah, my "naivety" looks good in front of his argumentation skills, which are atrocious.

The last point is to further prove how ignorant you really are. It is a completely separate point to the other points we have been discussing. But don't let that get in the way of your myopic world view. Continue believing anything I post is about how all of these entry level jobs pay 6 figures.



Here's what really happened:


1. You posted a very thinly veiled post where you brag about your idealized future self. Make tons of mistakes on the perfect scenario you feel was perfectly crafted to validate your embarassingly inflated opinion of yourself.
2. I point out, in my ignorance of the ongoing feud with others, how silly it is to hire you (Lily) for an obvious mid-level position and back up my claims with lots of evidence.
3. You get pissed because this is a direct affront to your ego. Confronted with facts and figures that burst you bubble of your idealized future, you go into a tirade.
4. Pretend you've been right, move goal posts, get shown that even your moved goalposts are still wrong, and get even more upset.
5. Make up shit about the conversation.
6. Get madder.
7. Heart rate goes up.
8. Get madder.
9. Fart a lot.
10. Shit your pants. Complete an entire bowel movement in your pants and then bounce up and down and the poop, squirting some out of the top of your pants.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
My "naive" assumption happened to be supported by actual data, while your "real world experience" was just an illusory product of your lack of comprehension skills.

And yet, I'm the one who actually posted real evidence. Actual, real, evidence, from your very own wish-list company, Google, and you ignored it.

Let me know when you land that 6 figure job at Google with 0 experience in a few years!

So, to wrap up this humiliating demonstration of Dadudemon's failures:

1. He questions the idea that someone can make six figures out of college as an engineer.
2. When showed the median entry level salary of Google software engineers, he finds a link to safety engineers and pretends they're the same thing.
3. When called out on that, he then claims that he never denied thinking you could make six figures out of college, but that they were just rare (even though he said exactly the opposite, and even though this OP is an outlier hypothetical in the first place).
4. When called out on that, he starts talking about SpaceX, even though I was talking about software companies like Google and Facebook.
5. When called out on that, he (well, had already) starts throwing insults about naivety and the "real world" when the original question was just a matter of googling payscale.
6. Then he starts talking about how six figures isn't actually that much, even though this fact would actually sabotage his own point that it's an implausible amount.

As it turns out, this discussion was mainly a product of reasoning skills and research ability, neither of which are very well correlated with age past your mid twenties anyway. Dadudemon tried to use his experience to compensate for his comprehension issues, even though he had less experience than me in Silicon Valley. And all of this because he was too arrogant to just concede the moment I pulled up the link to payscale.

Originally posted by dadudemon
And yet, I'm the one who actually posted real evidence. Actual, real, evidence, from your very own wish-list company, Google, and you ignored it.

Let me know when you land that 6 figure job at Google with 0 experience in a few years!

I love how I mentioned like five times that you were linking to a safety engineer while I was talking about software engineers, and you literally pretend to not notice my pointing that out. Pathetic. Can you not read, or are you just deliberately dishonest?

Hint: software engineers are hired straight out of college, why do you think they have software engineering college interns? It's so that they can be given a full-time offer if they do well.

BTW, not exactly a wish-list.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
So, to wrap up this humiliating demonstration of Dadudemon's failures:

1. He questions the idea that someone can make six figures out of college as an engineer.
2. When showed the median entry level salary of Google software engineers, he finds a link to safety engineers and pretends they're the same thing.
3. When called out on that, he then claims that he never denied thinking you could make six figures out of college, but that they were just rare (even though he said exactly the opposite, and even though this OP is an outlier hypothetical in the first place).
4. When called out on that, he starts talking about SpaceX, even though I was talking about software companies like Google and Facebook.
5. When called out on that, he (well, had already) starts throwing insults about naivety and the "real world" when the original question was just a matter of googling payscale.
6. Then he starts talking about how six figures isn't actually that much, even though this fact would actually sabotage his own point that it's an implausible amount.

As it turns out, this discussion was mainly a product of reasoning skills and research ability, neither of which are very well correlated with age past your mid twenties anyway. Dadudemon tried to use his experience to compensate for his comprehension issues, even though he had less experience than me in Silicon Valley. And all of this because he was too arrogant to just concede the moment I pulled up the link to payscale.


Now now, don't lie. Try to keep from having to lie to try to be right.

I was the first to point out that you can land a job like that due to a connection, not you:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15986680#post15986680

Note the use of "nepotism." And this was before I conceded that you wanted this to be about software engineers instead of my previously assumed aerospace engineer (because you said John has "been working at decently well known companies in the aerospace industry" which makes it rather obvious for what type of engineer you had in mind...not sure why you moved the goal posts from aerospace engineer to software engineer: oh wait, I do know: it's because they make far less right out of college so you had to move the goalposts to be right).

So you can't claim that I said this job was never ever had by anyone, ever, when I was the first to point out how it can happen.


I was also the first to point out that landing a job like that, with no experience, is an extremely low probability, and you even admitted it, here:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15991359#post15991359



I mean...you've admitted to having the same position as me, indirectly. I just so happened to support my position with actual employment trends (something you have to be aware of and can't just google to find evidence for...which is what many degrees are doing these days: planting ideas of what to search for when you need an answer).

Originally posted by The Ellimist
I love how I mentioned like five times that you were linking to a safety engineer while I was talking about software engineers, and you literally pretend to not notice my pointing that out. Pathetic. Can you not read, or are you just deliberately dishonest?

Hint: software engineers are hired straight out of college, why do you think they have software engineering college interns? It's so that they can be given a full-time offer if they do well.

BTW, not exactly a wish-list.


http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Google%2c_Inc./Salary/Job/Software-Engineer

Why did you ignore this?

And why did you ignore the post where I brought this up?

Originally posted by dadudemon
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Google%2c_Inc./Salary/Job/Software-Engineer

Why did you ignore this?

And why did you ignore the post where I brought this up?

How does that contradict anything I've said?

BTW, you do recognize that I'm being incredibly generous to you by only arguing the median Google salary, when Lily is essentially a prodigy, right?