If I had to guess, it'll be spring/summer 2025 until hiring freezes fully go away and non-senior role open up. Maybe start of 2025. These may be conservative estimates. More optimistic guesses would be fall 2024.
I say this because Interest Rates will be most likely lower than what they're at right now, which will cause money to flow into companies through VC and public investment.
Just a guess though, could easily be wrong. Keep an eye on startup investment and public ipo activity as a potential indicator of things.
for better or worse, we're going to become digital secretaries rather than digital plumbers, duty bound to interact with LLMs and take notes on their behalf.
Do you have a perspective on whether this will exacerbate the shortage of senior engineers in a few years, if way fewer new people enter the profession in that time period? Or will it be okay since the need for humans will reduce commensurately?
Really, I don’t think they fully replaced the juniors as only some of the job is code generation. A lot of basic support and edge case handling is falling on the intermediates who often now aren’t producing much of anything due to the support burden. Many of them are dissatisfied.
It depends. A lot of it is hard to parse out from company specific realities. These particular intermediates are only doing so much support as the product is selling a lot more than anticipated. We may be allocated support engineers to help out. So maybe support engineer becomes the new junior developer job as many of them are fairly technical but have no career track.
The current situation is definitely untenable, but it is not clear whether you need a full fledged developer do a lot of the work they are presently doing.
Keep in mind that this is a fairly large org of thousands, so smaller companies have different needs as full time support engineers may not be worth it. We already have some, they just are not allocated to this team.
As for your second question, one company phrased it something along the lines of "AI allows us to quickly do tasks for which we would otherwise need junior/certain classes of support team members." AI isn't just being used by developers, but all over the org. There is an AI steering group and everything.
Other employer hasn't said anything about it as AI implementation is less far along.
Agree with this. In fact, it's already changing in a couple of domains. (1) Teams that build data products often have product managers. (2) Data analytics consulting teams have project managers who interface between the clients and the analysts.
I've been on multiple H1B visas, at both large companies and startups. I've also sponsored H1B visas as an employer. I would support this bill.
The headline is a classic example of sensational journalism by the Times of India.
The $130k salary requirement applies only to "dependent employers", defined as employers with over 15% of their workforce on H1Bs. This is clearly aimed at reducing H1B misuse by TCS, Infosys, and their ilk.
The vast majority of companies who employ people on H1Bs aren't "dependent" employers by this definition, and hence will be unaffected by the salary increase rule. If anything, they'll benefit from more visas being available to non-dependent employers.
Also, startups will likely benefit from the 20% requirement.
As you said, this seems to penalize the Infosys-type companies, and seems to give favorable treatment to Silicon Valley firms. Given that's her district, this should not be surprising.
Regardless of the merits of this particular bill, at least we now have a conversation going with both political sides weighing in.
Here's hoping that they end up somewhere rational.
EOD, this is just a bill, such bills have been introduced in the past but never saw the light of day, its just that, this time around, this is being introduced under Trump.
All in all, there are some benefits in this bill. Does it say anything about green card backlog? or was my interpretation wrong?
Although a startup might only marginally benefit because a single one would be a significant portion of their employees, right? So it would be over 15% right off the bat if they have fewer than 7 people
There are enough unscrupulous actors that will pay 130k on paper and have ways of paying much less in reality. Enforcement and audits will also have to increase correspondingly, and penalties must be severe.
Since when? Those are (were) real $250k salaries. Accom (a donga) and flights are included. Living in Perth is pretty expensive though, and in fact many live in Bali.
You're including Austin, TX (Semiconductor) in that search. Their CA engineer salaries are much lower. Also, I wonder about that data. I've seen bigger CA databases that have more records and lower salaries. Also, look at what AirBNB pays their H1B's.
Does it remain a top-10 degree if thousands of people take the course every year? Genuine question. I work in education, and we struggle with this selectivity vs. access question ourselves.
It seems to only work for mobile now; I could not get it working from a desktop browser (with or without incognito mode), but using the web AMP link from my mobile shows me the whole article.
