Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | shagie's commentslogin

The chart with that data is https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6516123533d9510e36f3259c/...

Starting at 2019 and saying "pre-pandemic levels" might be a bit disingenuous since that was a leap to a boom... and the bust we're seeing now.

https://www.cbre.com/insights/articles/tech-boom-interrupted

    At $113B, 2019 was the third-highest year on record for VC deal volume.
    2019 had the second-highest volume of “mega rounds” ($100M deals or greater)–mega rounds represented 44% of total annual deal volume.
    Revenue grew by an average of 12.2% in 2019 and the total revenues of the tech giants was greater than the GDP of four of the G20 nations.
Yes, tech hiring in 2025 is down from 2019. That's a lot like saying "tech hiring is down from 2000" in 2003.

Thanks for the context, but there hasn't been a general tech sector crash since 2019, so I don't think the 2000-03 comparison is apt.

And while 2019 might have been third-highest year for investment in 2020, according to this it's been surpassed in 2021, 2022, and 2024

https://kpmg.com/xx/en/media/press-releases/2025/01/2024-glo...

So why have graduate hires continued to decline since 2023? It seems funds have been diverted from junior hiring into AI investments.

However, as others have remarked, this might be a case of "AI is not taking your jobs, AI investment is taking your jobs"

Junior hiring might pick up again once the spending spree is over


> The point of hiring a junior is that you get a (relative to the market) cheap investment with a long-term payoff.

This is only a consideration if you can pay enough to keep the junior for the long term pay off.

Companies that aren't offering Big Tech compensation find it very difficult to compete on this.

The best juniors will get a job paying more than your company can offer in 2 years. The worst juniors will remain the "still haven't progressed beyond what they could do after the first month."

In this situation, unless the company can continue to offer pay increases to match what Big Tech can offer, it is disadvantageous to hire a junior developer.


This is absolutely FUD.

Most engineers don't work at FAANG. Most _good_ engineers DONT work at FAANG. FAANG is still composed of almost all good engineers. Most software engineers are NOT _good_.

All of these things are simultaneously true.

Most of your junior engineering hires will never develop to FAANG levels, and as such are never in positions to seriously only hypercompete for those FAANG salaries. There vast majority of devs, even in the US, that are perfectly adequate (note, not great, adequate) to act as developers for non-FAANG companies for non-FAANG wages. This is the kind of developer universities are churning out at insane rates.


When you see 6.1% unemployment for computer science new grads, that invariably comes from

https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:...

Computer Science is tied for fourth lowest underemployment and is the 7th highest unemployment... and is also the highest early career median wage.

That needs to be compared to the underemployment chart https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:... and the unemployment chart https://www.newyorkfed.org/research/college-labor-market#--:... (and make sure to compare that with 2009).

Computer science is not getting wiped out by AI. Entry level jobs exist, though people may need to reset their expectations (note that median job being $80k) from getting a $150k job out of college - that was always the exception rather than the average.

There are average jobs out there that people with a "want to be on the coast and $150k" or "must be remote so I don't relocate" are thumbing their nose at.


I see people posting this all the time without mentioning that the page says "based on data from 2023." As someone who graduated in 2025, I can tell you that the market has changed significantly since then - Trump won election in 2024 and tariffs went into effect in 2025, for one.

It's been around for nearly a decade.

Taxing Robots : Easier Said Than Done (2017) https://www.ctf.ca/EN/EN/Newsletters/Canadian_Tax_Focus/2017...

Robots, technological change and taxation (2017) https://www.taxjournal.com/articles/robots-technological-cha...

Why robots should be taxed if they take people's jobs (2017) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/22/robots-tax-...


> I’m also a sucker for 35mm in medium format so you can see photo content around the glorious sprocket holes.

Have you seen Ted Orland's holga photos? https://www.anseladams.com/products/tree-in-snowstorm-yosemi... and https://www.anseladams.com/products/dawn-at-mono-lake-in-win...

---

I personally like 4x6 (a 5x7 is a bit more awkward and 8x10 is right out). One of my favorite things was when Polaroid peel apart film was available - I'd do a transfer to a watercolor post card in the field and put a stamp on it and send it. One of a kind photograph - while you could take another photograph there, you could never make the same print of it since it was a destructive process.

(Also neat being in the field and letting a young child do it from being under the hood to pulling out the film and transferring it to a post card or having the print as it is properly developed)


https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2550 For a fun read taken to April 1 absurdity.

From the post "Yes, the FCC might ban your operating system" - https://prplfoundation.org/yes-the-fcc-might-ban-your-operat...

    2.1033 Application for grant of certification. Paragraph 4(i) which reads:

    For devices including modular transmitters which are software defined radios and use software to control the radio or other parameters subject to the Commission’s rules, the description must include details of the equipment’s capabilities for software modification and upgradeability, including all frequency bands, power levels, modulation types, or other modes of operation for which the device is designed to operate, whether or not the device will be initially marketed with all modes enabled. The description must state which parties will be authorized to make software changes (e.g., the grantee, wireless service providers, other authorized parties) and the software controls that are provided to prevent unauthorized parties from enabling different modes of operation. Manufacturers must describe the methods used in the device to secure the software in their application for equipment authorization and must include a high level operational description or flow diagram of the software that controls the radio frequency operating parameters. The applicant must provide an attestation that only permissible modes of operation may be selected by a user.

    2.1042 Certified modular transmitters. Paragraph (8)(e) which reads:

    Manufacturers of any radio including certified modular transmitters which includes a software defined radio must take steps to ensure that only software that has been approved with a particular radio can be loaded into that radio. The software must not allow the installers or end-user to operate the transmitter with operating frequencies, output power, modulation types or other radio frequency parameters outside those that were approved. Manufacturers may use means including, but not limited to the use of a private network that allows only authenticated users to download software, electronic signatures in software or coding in hardware that is decoded by software to verify that new software can be legally loaded into a device to meet these requirements.

That appears to be a post arguing against adopting a rule that was proposed a decade ago. Was it ever actually enacted? I don't see the text of the proposed rule present in the relevant section here:

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-A...


I wonder if Aliexpress SDR sellers follow this regulations. And as for transmission power, you can simply connect regulation-complying SDR to regulation-complying amplifier and work around it.

One of the things that image shows is the slightly higher density of the Times version (compare row by row) allowing the paper to put more text on a page and thus reduce some of the costs.

This appears to be done by increasing the height of the lower case letters in the Times side while reducing the height of the capital letters at the same time. This then was also combined with a reduction in the size of some of the serifs which are measured against the height of the lowercase letter (compare the 'T' and the following 'h').

The Times is similarly readable at the smaller font size than the modern serif font - and scaling the modern font to the same density of text would have made the modern font less readable.

Part of that, it appears is the finer detail (as alluded to in the penultimate paragraph) - compare the '3' on each side.


> the slightly higher density of the Times version (compare row by row)

I don't think that's the comparison you want to draw? The rows appear to hold very similar amounts of text.

But the rows on the left, in Times New Roman, are shorter than the rows on the right. So even though "one row" holds the same amount of text, one column-inch of Times New Roman holds more rows.

The Times New Roman looks more readable to me because it has thicker strokes. This isn't really an issue in a digital font; you can't accidentally apply a thin layer of black to a pixel and let the color underneath show through.


> And Comic Sans for letters sent to friends finishing design school, obviously.

... and libressl. https://web.archive.org/web/20140625075722/http://www.libres... (and the talk - https://youtu.be/GnBbhXBDmwU?si=gMlhb2Xis5V8sR6K&t=2939 )


I took a semester long 500 level class back in college on the theory of knowledge. It is not easy to define - the entire branch of epistemology in philosophy deals with that question.

... To that end, I'd love to be able to revisit my classes from back then (computer science, philosophy (two classes from a double major), and a smattering of linguistics) with the world state of today's technologies.


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

Search: