Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is a good answer.

I could tell if GP was being sarcastic so I deleted my original reply.

The softer side of the equation is that the approach of filtering candidates for businesses allows them to minimize (to some market minimum) the cost for highly skilled individuals. Projects such as this just triggered a bone I'm presently picking over.

Old-guard corporations that hire the legally-liable kind of engineer seemed to have taken a much different approach if the stories I've been told by a retired mechanical engineer who worked for Chrysler are true. A completely irrational approach. They hired people based on their potential and made them into the engineers they needed.

The copy on the announcement sounds like this game will quantify everything about the performance of a participant in the game in order to sell them to a curated list of potential employers. What about this system incentives employers to invest in the career development of these people and strengthens our collective bargaining power as the people who build this stuff?

To be more constructive I might suggest turning down the hyperbole and use fewer adjectives. Keep the pitch to employers for employers. Don't be patronizing to inexperienced developers: inspecting the assembly output of a compiler is not elite and not difficult to explain to someone given the right context and framing. I understand your game is about competition but the "winner/failure" schism it can create is a big turn off for a lot of otherwise intelligent, creative, and capable people. It doesn't have to be about being, "the best," in order to be fun and rewarding.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: