I don't know the exact reason, but when they don't share the process or prompt, it seems like they're trying to gatekeep their results – which is very ironic from someone using a tool made possible by ingesting other people's work without their consent.
That's interesting to hear, because my impression was that software/web development is a field full of people who are self-taught or at least very enthusiastic about learning new tech. I am personally pretty undogmatic when it comes to languages or tools and I assumed most developers who care about solving problems are the same way.
Sought after candidates is not how software hiring works. Maybe start ups flush with cash are an exception, but for everyone else hiring almost always is dominated by perceived compatibility more than anything else, even more than utility need.
That is because there are smart people in the world that can self educate and jump into new technology with minimal friction, but those people are rare. Most employers want employees as early as the position opens and they don’t want to invest in training. Java is super desirable to employers because many developers are taught Java in school, it’s single paradigm, and it’s terse OOP conventions force the vague shape of a uniform architectural style. Most developers only know enough to be hired and not enough to write original software, of any style, so employers have to account for these things as though everyone is a junior developer, least common denominator.
That line of thinking suggests lower expenses, ease of candidate selection, and a wider candidate pool. In reality it tends to result in a less qualified larger labor pool with greater insecurity. This is why everything on the JavaScript side is about giant frameworks and the software is super bloated, because putting text to screen is all that matters but nobody knows how the technology works without a framework.
I agree with this observation. I often assumed it would be an USP if I highlight that I want to understand how things work instead of blindly following paradigms and frameworks, but it seems that (a sense of) uniformity just comes with too many perceived advantages, like you said.
Much better than last year, which is what I had been hoping for. There's still a ways to go, but it seems the worst is behind me, finally. It was a long and dark period with extremely crippling anxiety. Ironically, what helped most was to stop trying so hard to get better, but not letting myself go either. A very tricky balance to achieve that mainly hinges on your ability to talk to yourself in a kind, encouraging way. As someone who has an avid aversion to advice that seems to be superficial feel-good fluff I rejected the "be kind to yourself" concept for a while. Which, I realize, was my inner bully hijacking my logical brain making me believe I was doing something "right" by being cynical and unforgiving with myself.
That is really interesting. The potential side effects from toxicity listed on wikipedia [1] are ominous. I wish there was consumer technology to effectively monitor ones own blood work.
