On Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:19:36 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> Most of the stuff I do has no useful function.
>> 
>> I don't believe that's true.  Just because you feel it has no useful
>> function doesn't mean it has no useful function.  You need to stop
>> substituting your view of the world for the way the world works and
>> then assume that because you think something is useless (or that it is
>> useless to you), that it's useless for everyone.
> 
> If you know of a commercial application for Mandelbrot plotters, I'd be
> interested in hearing about it...

Have you looked at acedemia for something like this?  But what little 
I've read about fractals, that type of maths comes in handy with 
rendering realistic organics, so that might be an area where you could 
make some cash - someplace that does visual effects.

>> I've been most successful at applying for jobs not through the front
>> door, but through a side door.  Find an advantage and USE IT.
> 
> Fair enough.

You have to assume that everyone is looking for advantages to use it - 
doing things the way the company expects (or not even expects, but tells 
you to do it) puts you at a disadvantage.

>>> Ah yes, nothing like somebody telling you that all your hard work
>>> "isn't really trying" to motivate you to continue.
>> 
>> Tell me what you've done in the last 30 days, then.
> 
> To be honest, I completely gave up on the job hunt a few months ago. 

I hate to say it, but there you go. :/

> It
> seems so utterly fruitless. As I've indicated, I'm planning to start
> again in the new year, looking in the direction of sysadmin rather than
> programmer to see if that gets me any further.

That's good, and of course it can take time, especially in a down economy 
- just don't give up and look for those advantages.

>> Only you can motivate you.  I can't do it, nobody can do it.  Hell, I
>> can't even provide you with an incentive to make a change.  I'm telling
>> you what I'm seeing from over here - you fill out an application or
>> send in a CV and then you wait to hear something.
> 
> As far as I know, that's how people get jobs. I don't really know what
> else there is to do.

Well, I've already given you some ideas - don't deal with recruiters who 
won't give you the company contact info - deal with the companies 
directly.  Things like that help.

> I know you hear of people who such a ridiculously superhuman level of
> self-confidence that they just walk into a building and say "I think you
> should hire me", and it sometimes actually works. But, obviously, this
> is beyond my capabilities.

Well, I don't think it's beyond your capabilities, but it also doesn't 
ever really happen that way - not in larger companies, anyways.  I did it 
once about 18 years ago, and that was moving from assembly line work to 
the MIS department (so it wasn't walking into a business I had never been 
in before).

>> You do not persist in
>> trying to make a change.  That's what I'm seeing - so if that's not
>> accurate, then correct my perception.
> 
> It's one part not knowing what the hell to try, and two parts just
> lacking the motivation to keep going in the face of unending rejections.

Well, you can ask here for ideas of what to try.  As for motivation in 
the face of continued rejection, all I can say is to think about how much 
you dislike your current boss/job/coworkers and let that motivate you to 
keep trying.

>>> Ah, I see. So what you're saying is I should read this:
>>>
>>>    "Candidates are expected to have a relevant PhD in Finance,
>>> Economics, Mathematics or Computing Science. In exceptional cases we
>>> may consider candidates with outstanding degree grades."
>>>
>>> as meaning this:
>>>
>>>    "We will accept anybody who applies."
>>>
>>> Sure, seems completely plausible to me. :-P
>> 
>> Very often that *is* the case, yes.
> 
> ...OK, well I guess there's really little point in bothering to read the
> job description then. o_O

You need to know what the job entails, but that's really all I tend to 
read into job descriptions myself.  You do need to know if you're 
applying for a job to bus tables or to empty the trash, but beyond that, 
if it sounds interesting, there's nothing to lose.

>> You've got nothing to lose by applying for a job that you'd like to
>> have regardless of the requirements.  The worst that happens is it's
>> not a good fit.  The best that happens is you get the job.
> 
> Or rather, the worst that happens is some guy phones me up and asks me
> what the hell I'm playing at daring to apply for a job I'm clearly not
> qualified for, and I get to spend the rest of the day feeling like
> crap...

Rarely if ever happens, and if it does, just thank them for calling to 
let you know that they're not interested in you as an applicant and ask 
them to keep you in mind if a better fit does apply.

Then hang up the phone and laugh at what an asshole they are for not even 
bothering to find out more about you as a candidate, and consider 
yourself lucky to have not been offered a job working for people who 
would behave so dickishly towards someone they know nothing about.

>> It depends on how badly they need to fill the position as well.
> 
> Well, that's true too. I only got my current job because they were
> absolutely desperate, and I was cheap.

And from the job you've gained some experience, which helps you with the 
next job.

>> But you're getting tied down in the details instead of hearing what I'm
>> saying in a more general way:  If you see a programming position that
>> looks interesting to you, apply for it.  Don't read the detailed
>> requirements over other than to see if it's an area that you're
>> interested in.  Demonstrate the ability to apply programming skills to
>> a problem (which is something you can do).
> 
> I suppose. Trouble is, you can't really show them anything unless you
> can get them to actually talk to you. I usually don't get that far.

It takes persistence and sometimes takes trying a number of different 
companies.  It also takes varying your approach if an approach you're 
using doesn't seem to be working.  Scott was right about tailoring your 
CV for a particular position - that does help.  It doesn't have to be 
completely new, but (for example) adjusting the objective to better fit 
the job you're applying for can be helpful.

>>>> Why should they hire you?  Because if you're applying for the job,
>>>> you have some passion in the area (because you wouldn't apply for a
>>>> job you didn't have passion for, right?) and because you know your
>>>> skills will grow as you learn the job.
>>> By that metric, they should just hire anybody who actually applies.
>> 
>> That's not what I said, and you know that.
> 
> No, it actually looks to me like you're saying anybody who applies for a
> job must be really movatived, and that's reason enough to hire them.
> That doesn't make a lot of sense.

People are motivated to apply for different reasons.  Some apply because 
it lets them continue collecting unemployment benefits - and they have no 
interest in actually getting the job.  You have to show interest in the 
position and an aptitude (in their judgment, not yours) for the job.

>> But you seem to think that it
>> works by having 100% of the skills requested (you think "requested" =
>> "demanded") going in.  *THAT* is NOT how it works.
> 
> As you say, nobody is a 100% fit. But I *do* expect that you'd need to
> be, say, an 80% fit in order to get hired. If you aren't, somebody else
> will be.

Well, like I said in another post written earlier, the job that got me in 
at Novell I feel I was about 33% qualified for (one requirement out of 
three).  But I got the job.

>> Your assumptions and knowledge are based on the experience of being
>> hired once.  My assumptions and knowledge are based on having worked in
>> several jobs in several different industries.  Why do you continue to
>> insist that you know better what I'm talking about than I do?
> 
>> 4.  Lack of good references:
> 
> Ooo, that reminds me... My CV claims that I have references. I'd better
> go find some. o_O

That would be a good idea. :-)

>> 5.  Lack of specific credentials:
> 
> So somebody can get not hired for not having a Cisco certificate, but if
> you don't have a PhD certificate that's no problem?

It all depends on the job requirements (CNI isn't Cisco, BTW, it's a 
Novell instructor certification - and yes, I got hired to teach Novell 
classes even though I didn't have the *required* certification).

>>>> Formal education is overrated.
>>> Pity. That's about the only good thing I've got going for me.
>> 
>> I would disagree.  You've got an extensive informal education that
>> shows that you are a motivated self-learner, and that you have
>> curiosity about things and are willing to research those things that
>> interest you.
> 
> Heh. Does anybody else here think I should just get Jim to tell
> employers about me rather than me tell them? The way you talk, you make
> it sound as if I'm somehow worth having...

Well, I have some experience in self-marketing.  That is what a CV is - a 
marketing document.  I also happen to believe that you do have real 
skills and would be an asset to anyone who hired you.  I see a lot of 
potential in your abilities that you don't seem to see in yourself, and 
there is a certain amount of moulding that could be done to really make 
you shine.  If I was in a hiring position and had something that I felt 
you could do, I'd be making a suggestion for you to apply for it; sadly, 
Novell is not in a position to hire right now, and our development and 
sysadmin jobs aren't in the UK.  I've been keeping an eye out, but I 
don't hear a lot about jobs in the UK because I'm not there.

If you were willing to be more mobile, that would make it easier for me 
to keep an eye open for something that you might find interesting.

>> You're still insisting on making the decision for the prospective
>> employer to not hire you.  That's THEIR decision to make and not yours!
>> I'm going to KEEP saying that until you demonstrate that you understand
>> it.
> 
> Well, I *did* apply anyway, didn't I?

Yes, you have at times applied.  But you didn't follow up the way I would 
have done, and that's one significant difference.  A big part of the 
reason is that you don't know how because you haven't had to do that kind 
of follow-up before.  Not your fault, but you need to be willing to learn 
how.

>>>> Don't let life happen to you - take control!
>>> You say this as if it's actually physically possible.
>> 
>> It *is* possible.  I forget who it is who said "I've been very lucky in
>> my life - and it takes a lot of work to be as lucky as I have been",
>> but it's a very true statement.
>> 
>> Contrary to your apparent belief, you're not a hot air balloon being
>> pushed around by winds you cannot control.  If you don't take control
>> of your life, then someone else will, and you'll feel like you're not
>> in control.  It's your life, and you need to take control and make
>> things happen.
> 
> This is contrary to everything I have ever experienced in my life, so
> excuse me if I don't immediately believe it. No disrespect, but every
> single time I've tried to get somewhere in life, I have failed
> spectacularly. It seems that no matter how much energy I expend, nothing
> happens. So when people say to me "take control of life", my resonse is
> "dude, like, HOW?! It can't be done."

I can understand why you feel the way you do; I did for many years 
myself.  It takes persistence to push past it, and it also (in my 
experience) means not taking life so seriously.  Someone doesn't call you 
back - so what?  (Yes, I know how hard that is - BTDTGTTS).

At the same time, though, you've done a lot in the past few years (that 
I've seen up here) that has expanded your horizons; you've been skiing 
more (it seems); you took up dance classes and really seem to enjoy them 
immensely.  I've seen you fight back in discussions up here (including a 
couple of times where I provoked you into a pretty strong response - and 
I have to say I was *impressed* with how well you held your ground in 
those instances), which is something you hadn't done before.  You're 
learning to stand up for yourself, and that's a GOOD thing.

Applying that in an online forum is a good first step.  Applying it in 
'meatspace' is the next step.  I'm fairly certain you can do it 
successfully, probably in your place of employ - like the next time 
someone demands something from you that you judge to be unreasonable; 
telling them to "do it themselves" if it's so easy that they judge you 
should be able to do it in no time at all when in fact the request is 
much more complex than they understand.  Might they complain to your 
boss?  Probably.  Might your boss have words with you about it?  You can 
almost certainly count on it.  But I've seen you stand up here to similar 
criticism and hold your own very well - and I'm sure you could explain to 
your boss that the user was giving you attitude about how you do your job 
with no understanding of what that actually entails or of what their 
request was - and they "pushed me past my limit", so rather than argue 
with them, you told them to do it themselves and walked away from it to 
cool off.

Then ask your boss how you should deal with unreasonable demands from end 
users - what you should do when they ask for something that's ridiculous 
or impossible.  They have their areas of expertise, and you have yours.  
You don't tell them how to run a centrifuge, and they shouldn't tell you 
how to fix their workstation - because if they know how to fix it, then 
they damned well SHOULD fix it themselves.  (Maybe not in those words, 
but you get my meaning).

Jim

Post a reply to this message