Out of those that are real, how many of them are completely out of touch with what they're asking for? Whether low salary, unrealistic expectations regarding experience/skills, etc?
Out of those that pass the above filter, how many of them have unrealistic application requirements such as tech tests, etc?
And so on. Hiring is a market for lemons, with scammers on both sides.
Anyway, if all of those people applied to each of the companies in who's hiring, and got hired, the unemployment rate for this subset of applicants would still be 50%. And this was for a junior role as well.
Even with experience I have found applying to full remote jobs to be difficult these days, they are generally voids that thousands of resumes get submitted to and you'll never even know if yours was looked at.
I've had better luck via networking and recruiters with jobs that are asking for at least occasional in-person visits which means that the city / metro area you live in remains very important to your ability to land a job.
- Must have 10 years experience with ChatGPT and 20 years experience in PyTorch.
- Entry level
- Must be willing to relocate to a red state in the US and work under the table
- Must be willing to take the fall for our mishandling of data
1 "Zigment (https://zigment.ai) | Bangalore / Bengaluru, India | Full-time | ONSITE"
2 "Rinse | IT Manager / Network Administrator / System Administrator | Hybrid in SF Bay Area, Los Angeles, New York (Brooklyn), Boston, Chicago, Seattle, Washington DC, or Newark. (Primarily remote with some on-site responsibilities.) | Full-time | https://www.rinse.com"
3 "CVector | Full Stack Software Engineer | USA | REMOTE | Full-time | $75k – $120/yr + 0.3% – 1%"
When a company advertises a role, they are increasingly looking for someone who either has done the same exact job in the exact specific niche with proven success for a number of years, or an absolute super star who would excel at anything thrown at them.
Most people are neither, so matches are exceedingly rare.
1. contribute to a significant open source project
2. write some significant work of software
3. design and build your own computer
4. build a robot something
5. work as an intern in industry
6. do work as a research assistant
When I was at Caltech, students did (entirely on their own):
1. built a gas powered helicopter from scratch
2. built a tracked robot with an arm and a manipulator
3. built an electronic synthesizer
4. built a functioning railroad that ran through the dorm
5. many built a single board computer for their own use
6. designed and built the campus radio station
7. one fellow designed, built, and sold custom speakers in the student workshop. After graduating, he turned it into a real business and made a fortune
and so on. In other words, turn yourself into someone useful to a company.
And as a manager, I'd absolutely lean towards a recent graduate with some experience over no experience. My "success rate" for grads who have co-op experience (full-time job, often delays graduation by a semester or year) is the highest. Next would be those that had long-term part-time employment (university IT office, etc). Then basic internships. And last, no experience at all - and the "success rate" on them has been low enough I probably wouldn't chance hiring another one.
For example, one guy I interviewed spent all his time asking about what benefits he was going to get. He had no interest whatsoever in what he'd be doing, and what the company was doing. No hire.
Unfortunately, such is commonplace. This gives the savvy interviewee an advantage - approach the interview from the employer's point of view. Save your questions about how much vacation you'll get until after the employer has decided to hire you.
Secondly, yeah, I'm not like that. I've got three or so side projects (I guess they're just projects now) I'm actively working on and have been building things with my teens. It doesn't matter anymore socially, like everything else in the US your counterpart just never shows up.
Showing interest in the company is very helpful. Asking questions like how does the company make money, what is their criteria for a successful employee, what does the division you're applying for contribute to the success of the company, what kind of person are they looking for, and so on.
That wasn't my point. My point was the candidate should show interest in the company.
After all, if you're buying a car, does the car salesman sell you on the commission he's going to make?
BTW, Caltech places emphasis on get-up-and-go in their student selections. I was a marginal candidate, and I found out years later that my projects I worked on in my spare time made the difference. I was always building things in the garage and in the high school shop. (But I didn't tell them about the flame thrower I made from a lawnmower.)