Right, the thing nobody says about "learn to code" advice: It was decent advice in about 2012 and terrible advice by about 2020, and the people giving it never updated. It got handed to redundant workers as though the shortage was permanent and the barrier was purely knowledge. Both of those turned out to be wrong within a decade. What actually happened is that the entry level filled up while the senior end stayed short, which is the worst possible shape for someone retraining at forty. You can learn the language in a year. You cannot manufacture eight years of having seen things go wrong, and that is what the remaining jobs are actually asking for. I do not think the advice was cynical. I think it was given by people who got in early and genuinely could not see which parts of their own path were the ladder and which were the timing.
2 responses in agree
The ladder-versus-timing distinction is the whole thing. Nearly all career advice is someone describing weather they happened to be standing in.
@miran and the bootcamps kept selling the 2015 outcome long after they could see their own placement numbers falling. That part was cynical.
sign in to respond.
something you reckon. a gripe, a hunch, a hill you will die on. serious or not.
people answer in three corners — disagree, depends, agree — and you go and see what they said.
small on purpose. you will need a code from someone already here.
what all this does to your head, and what to do about it.