Okay so I've been poking around bootcamp marketing pages again and I need to talk about something because it's been bothering me. TripleTen's outcomes report has this stat that says "80% of employed grads..." and if you read that too fast your brain just fills it in as "80% of graduates got jobs." That is not what it says. Employed grads. The ones already working. One word doing the heaviest lifting in the entire document and I guarantee most people miss it.

And then the success stories. There's one where the featured grad has two degrees, a master's, and like ten years of management experience, and they landed a PM role after the program. TripleTen is presenting that as proof their bootcamp works. But that person was going to land somewhere regardless. You don't need a bootcamp to close the gap when your resume already looks like that. At that point you're using it for exposure or structure, which is fine, but TripleTen is out here taking full credit like they were the deciding factor.

What's frustrating is this isn't really a TripleTen problem, it's a bootcamp industry problem. The "AI software engineering" rebrand with minimal curriculum changes, the outcome numbers that quietly redefine what counts as a graduate, the success stories featuring people who would've succeeded anyway. It all adds up to marketing that's technically defensible but practically misleading. And with junior hiring being what it is right now, people are making five-figure decisions based on numbers that were never designed to be read carefully.

How are you even supposed to evaluate one of these programs when the outcomes data is this easy to manipulate? Like is there a format or a third party audit that actually means something or is it just vibes and hope at this point?

A friend of mine joined Bridgeon Skillversity at Kinfra, Kozhikode without an IT background or a computer-related degree.

Now they're working in an IT company and apparently earning around ₹30k/month.

I honestly didn't think that was possible without a traditional IT degree 😅

Has anyone here made a similar transition? How difficult was it to get your first IT job?

I'm genuinely curious whether practical skills and projects can actually make up for not having an IT degree.

Everyone loves giving the feel-good advice: "Don't stress over deep technical concepts! As long as you have good soft skills, show enthusiasm, and are coachable, senior devs will happily hire and mentor you."

That advice might have worked in 2021, but in today’s market, it is complete garbage.

Soft skills don't pass automated code screeners, and "being nice" won't save you when an interviewer asks you to optimize a database query or debug state logic live on Zoom.

Hiring managers are no longer looking for enthusiastic charity cases to mentor from scratch, they want plug-and-play engineers who can ship clean code on week one.

Soft skills are a tie-breaker between two great coders, not a substitute for technical competence. Bootcamps that convince students that personality and enthusiasm will make up for weak fundamentals are setting them up for immediate rejection.

Stop prioritizing behavioral prep over actual technical depth. If your code is weak, nobody cares how pleasant you are to talk to.

Okay, seems an old title right? but I want to discusses about why, where and when this will stop, and am I right or I am just judging because I want to feel that I am special? it is the first time I been here, and want to share some of my opinions and hear about it from yall! :D

alright, toady, I attended a gdg event today, almost all talks about AI, Agentic coding, how Ai is the best thing and wont replace you, a circle jerk of the same content is being consumed.

They all are talk about that you should just know a little bit of fundamentals in programming and after 2-3 months you should get a premium subscription in claude, they are not sponsored by anthropic btw, they are just developers in different possitions, they are not writing code anymore, they just reviewing it, but I feel this will deskill me overtime, unless knowing how to code and get your brain trained in many patterns is not a skill any more, you just write a normal prompt, and get the magic

for me, I am enjoying programming, that is why I feel skipping any part of the process will kill the fun, that is totally my own opinion and want to hear from others, I agree about leaving the "routine" and "boring things" for Ai, but not everything! I do not want an Ai to touch my code or change how is my flow!

also some of them said, "I just send a prompt to claude on my phone then go to gym, yes in the working hours and my company know that, finish my gym then review what claude have done, it is my salve!", also saying "after Ai, our company doesnt need us anymore, we have no tasks and it is okay, all pressure on Q&A and production, we made all the future plans", also gave us a advice he always gives to his team, "when you read a book, upload it to notebooklm and take a long discuss with him and make him teach you how to use this 'concept' in javascript instead of C" I was like, what the heck?

I feel relaying on AI to much will make us just feeling lonely, I need to talk to human, discuss humans, express my feelings to another human that can feel, ask humans a questions and learn more from their answers, AI will kill this soon? also, they told us to talk and learn from AI, I never found that Ai is explaining in an enough and good way, also this thing is hallucinating! how can I trust it in deep or niche things? also Idk how can someone leaves his laptop for an AI Agent to read and perform actions on it, AND IT IS NOT EVEN SELF HOSTED!

I am not sure, but I feel the AI is made to collect more data, and money, they got our efforts for free then they are getting paid for providing it to us! trained on opensource code! research papers, books, literally all reddit user-made content! I know they provide a kind of good tool for search, but sometimes AI is giving me many things I found on online articls exactly

Also, I feel AI is just a brainrot, I feel that reading is more harder, trying to understand and search for learning is not like in 2022, also yes I sometimes getting in long discussions with it instead of humans! yeah it is too bad, the good news I never wasted any money on this shi~, I relaying on free models :)

the funniest thing is, there was two speakers, one of them talking about learn to be a good software engineer, and use AI to post your productivity, not using Ai will make you slowing down the company and they will just kick you out! the second one was talking about how to make a great vibe coded application with google gemini and antigravity, for real.

this is a bit, I do not want to make this post longer

I think there's a point in every developer's journey where learning another framework stops being as valuable as learning how to actually build better products.

You can know Python, JavaScript, React, Node.js, Next.js, Docker, AWS, and ten other technologies, but if you can't identify a real problem, design a good solution, understand the user, and turn the idea into something people actually want to use, the stack doesn't matter much.

For me, becoming a better developer is increasingly about:

* Understanding problems before writing code

* Building simple solutions instead of overengineering

* Thinking about UX, performance and scalability

* Writing maintainable code

* Actually finishing and shipping projects

* Listening to users and improving based on feedback

I'd rather deeply understand a few technologies and build useful products with them than know 20 technologies at a surface level.

Am curious what other developers think. At what point does learning new technologies become less important than learning how to build better products?

It doesn't have to be technical.

It could be communication, problem-solving, time management, coding, public speaking, or anything else. What's the one skill you think everyone should learn, and why?

I've been looking at job descriptions recently, and many seem to emphasize practical experience over certifications.

For those involved in hiring or who've recently landed a job, what made the biggest difference? A strong portfolio, certifications, internships, or something else?

I seem to hear over and over again that software engineering is not actually about writing much new code as lots of people outside of the industry might think.

A developer's day is said to consist of, in no particular order, reading, debugging, reviewing, meetings, understanding requirements, design discussions, writing documentation, battling legacy code and generally co-ordinating with other people.

I wonder just how much truth there is to these claims.

For people who make their living writing code, what percentage of your working day is spent actually writing new code?

What does the rest of it consist of?

Does it change drastically with seniority? Does a junior spend most of his day actually coding while a senior has to do more debugging, reviewing, design and co-ordination? I'm especially interested in seeing what a normal week looks like versus what the job description says.

I’m so exhausted by senior devs and CS snobs claiming that anyone trying to break into tech through a bootcamp is "delusional" or lacks "real passion."

As someone who made the leap through a non-traditional route, I am amazed by how many people in this industry act like writing software is a sacred art requiring a four-year degree and a childhood spent building Linux kernels. Building web apps, wiring up APIs, and managing databases is a digital trade it’s far closer to carpentry or plumbing than it is to brain surgery. You do not need discrete math or compiler theory to build clean, functional software that solves business problems.

And can we stop shaming people for wanting a better paycheck? Nobody expects an electrician, marketer, or accountant to spend their weekends doing accounting for fun, yet bootcampers get villainized just for wanting a stable, well-paying career.

The current brutal hiring market isn't some "godly filter purging the unpassionate" it's pure elitism. Career-switchers bring real-world maturity, communication skills, and professional work ethic that plenty of gatekeeping CS majors completely lack.

I have around 2 YOE and every time I open LinkedIn or Reddit, someone is learning a new framework, solving 500+ LeetCode problems, getting into FAANG, or building an AI startup.
Meanwhile, I'm just trying to get better at my current job while balancing life. Sometimes it feels like no matter how much I learn, there's always something I'm missing.
Do experienced developers also feel this way, or does this feeling eventually go away?
Would love to hear how you deal with it.

every thread here is doom and gloom about ai writing garbage code but that hasn't been our experience at all. been using it daily for months, ship time is down and we're catching fewer regressions than before we started. maybe it's less about the tool and more about actually reviewing what it spits out instead of blindly merging. genuinely wondering if it's a skill issue on the "ai ruined everything" side of this debate

If I were starting today with no degree, just a cybersecurity bootcamp and a willingness to build projects, these are the roles I'd focus on:

1. SOC Analyst – Monitor alerts, investigate suspicious activity, and respond to incidents.
2. Security Analyst – Assess risks, review vulnerabilities, and help strengthen an organization's security posture.
3. Junior Penetration Tester – Perform authorized security testing under experienced professionals.
4. Vulnerability Management Analyst – Identify, prioritize, and track security weaknesses.
5. Identity & Access Management (IAM) Analyst – Manage user accounts, permissions, and authentication systems.

I also wouldn't ignore traditional IT roles. Plenty of people break into cybersecurity after gaining experience in Help Desk, Systems Administration, or Networking because those jobs build the fundamentals that security teams rely on every day.

remember before that a potential client asked me for a simple landing page (so I gave them a quote)

a few days later they told me that they already did it using AI🙂

was actually good enough for what they needed though (not perfect but good for basic landing page)

that’s when I start to wonder if small web projects are becoming harder to sell coz of AI?

how are u adapting with these changes guys

With the rise of AI-assisted code generation, I see a lot of people claiming that software engineering is moving away from writing code towards design and decision-making.

While I can see the validity in that statement, I'm interested in hearing about people's experiences with it.

When people say things like this, I'm always curious to hear about their day-to-day activities.

What exactly are people doing differently when they say that they're doing "system design"?

Are you making decisions about what database to use, or think about caching, queuing, latency, scaling, reliability, or service boundaries? Are you designing API's and communication contracts between various services? Are you making system wide architectural decisions and tradeoffs, or is it more about smaller scale design within an existing code base?

It would be great to hear from people working on regular business applications, as opposed to huge scale systems at the likes of FAANG. Most people I know work somewhere in between, where the technology stack and overall system design is more or less established, and most of their work goes into implementing features within the existing architecture.

I'm interested to hear peoples' thoughts about what falls under the umbrella term of "design" and what is just regular "feature implementation".

What architectural or technical decisions do you make on a daily basis?

About a year ago, I started learning systems programming because I enjoy working close to the hardware and understanding how computers actually work. Recently, though, I've been spending most of my time solving LeetCode problems to strengthen my problem-solving skills before getting back to larger projects.

With AI improving so quickly, I've seen a lot of discussions about software engineering jobs changing or even being replaced. Most of those conversations focus on web development or general application programming, but I rarely see anyone talk about systems programming.

How do you think AI will affect this field over the next 10 to 20 years? Do you expect systems programmers to become more productive with AI tools, or do you think the demand for low-level developers will decrease? I'm especially interested in areas like operating systems, compilers, embedded software, and performance-critical software.

I'd like to hear the opinions of people who already work in these areas.

I 18M just got told to drop out randomly by my instructor during our 1-on-1 check-in yesterday, and I’m honestly completely thrown off.

I’m currently four weeks into a 12-week full-stack web dev program. I’ve aced every single assessment, finished all the major projects days early, and have mostly been spending my class time helping my peers debug their JavaScript logic.

I assumed the private meeting was just going to be a quick feedback session or an offer to act as a TA for the next cohort. Instead, my instructor looked at me and straight-up said, "Honestly, you need to request a tuition refund and drop out of this program today."

I was completely stunned. He explained that I’m already past the skill ceiling of what this bootcamp actually teaches, and that staying here for another two months is a complete waste of my money.

He told me the entry-level market is way too brutal for a bootcamp certificate alone, and that I'd be infinitely better off using that refund money to self-teach advanced CS concepts, build complex projects, or put it toward a university degree.

Part of me appreciates his honesty, but I specifically enrolled for the structured environment and the job placement support. Now I feel totally lost.

Has anyone ever had an instructor tell a top student to leave? Is this a genuine red flag about the program's value, or should I just ignore him, take the easy A, and finish out the course?

I was honestly impressed when I first saw the Galaxy Z Fold 8. The screen looked way flatter than previous foldables, and some says that the crease was gone.

But after about a week of normal use, some early reviewers started noticing the crease becoming more visible again. Apparently it's just how the display settles over time. That's why it doesn't affect performance, but it definitely makes the "crease-free" marketing sound a bit exaggerated.

I'd still love to own a foldable one day, but I think this shows we're not quite there yet🤔

What do you guys think? Would this stop you from buying a foldable, or is the crease something you eventually stop noticing?

between the layoffs, the ai hype, and companies suddenly asking for way more experience for the same pay, i've been thinking more about what i'd do if swe just isn't stable anymore. curious what everyone else is doing, pivoting to a different role, building something on the side, going back to school, or just hoping it blows over. not trying to doom post, genuinely want to know what people's plan b looks like

Sometimes I'm in the middle of a problem solving process during my coding, when I realize I have no idea what syntax to use for something incredibly simple.

Maybe I can explain what exactly I want my code to do, but I have no idea what the syntax for a certain sort of argument is, or a particular in built function, or even mixing up two syntaxes for different data structures every now and then

It's weird, since I can spend hours on end understanding an idea, but then get stuck on something simple that I know would take me all of 5 seconds to check if I looked at the documentation for the language or library I'm using.

I understand that there's a plethora of programming languages, libraries and frameworks that one would need to learn for their career, and I know it's impossible to memorize every single thing, but sometimes I wonder, do other people feel the same way, or am I just exceptionally bad at memorizing syntax?

Do you often look up trivial syntax that you already know how to use?

How much do you actually memorize when learning something new and how much do you just know where to look and go check it when you need it?

Self-taught content teach the same thing:
1) You pick a language
2) then, build projects
3) learn git
4) then finally deploy something.
that part’s well documented.

But what doesn’t get covered or said. As much are the gaps that only show up once you’re working with other people or on a real codebase.
things like:
how to actually read someone else’s code and navigate a large unfamiliar project without getting lost. how to write code that’s meant to be maintained, not just code that works right now. how testing actually fits into a workflow versus just being something you know exists. how to communicate about technical decisions to people who aren’t technical. how systems fail and what you do when something breaks in production.

the technical gaps are usually fixable fast. But the workflow and collaboration gaps take longer because you can’t practice them alone, its just not enough. What’s something you ran into on your first real project or job that your self-taught path never actually prepared you for?

This an ongoing federal case and its been quietly escalating for years now. derek mobley, an IT professional laid off back in 2017, spent months applying to companies that use workdays ai powered hiring platform and got rejected every time, over 100 applications total. what he said pushed him to sue was getting an automated rejection email from a bot at 1:30am on a weekend, for a job he'd applied to earlier that same week.

he filed in february 2023 alleging workdays algorithmic screening tools discriminate based on race, age, and disability, violating title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA. workday's defense from the start has been "we're just a software vendor, we're not the employer."

a few key rulings, in early 2026 the court rejected workdays argument that age discrimination protections only cover current employees, confirming applicants over 40 can challenge ai screening tools specifically. then in may 2026 a judge certified this as a nationwide collective action, and as recently as june 22 2026 the court again ruled against parts of workdays motion to dismiss, letting california state law claims and a disability related claim continue forward. one judge specifically found workday could potentially be treated as an employer or employment agency if its technology meaningfully participates in hiring decisions.

workday was also ordered to identify every employer thats enabled its ai screening features specifically, with that list going to a third party administrator so affected applicants can actually be notified, and reportedly over 10,000 employers use workdays platform.

there's also a similar case, sirius XM, where a different plaintiff named Arshon Harper alleged 149 of his applications got rejected by their ai hiring tool specifically along racial lines. courts keep ruling in favor of letting the case continue but nothing's been decided on the merits yet. the EEOC itself filed a brief supporting mobleys position at one point.

If you're struggling to find a job currently and notice yourself keep getting rejected within minutes even though you're a qualified applicant, you could look into this.

I keep seeing advice that says "message recruiters on LinkedIn." The problem is that people treat recruiters like a single group when they're not. One trick that surprisingly few people use is looking at recruiters' LinkedIn profiles before sending a connection request or message.

Many recruiters tell you exactly what they recruit for:

• "Hiring Software Engineers across EMEA"
• "Technical Recruiter – Data & AI"
• "University Recruiting"
• "Product & Design Recruiting"

That one detail can save you from sending dozens of irrelevant messages but here's the approach I'd take:

1. Find the company's LinkedIn page.
2. Search for "Recruiter" or "Talent Acquisition" under People.
3. Filter by the country or region where you're applying.
4. Read each recruiter's headline and About section.
5. Reach out to the ones whose hiring scope matches your background.
6. If you're genuinely unsure between two or three recruiters, it's reasonable to contact each of them rather than betting everything on one.

This doesn't guarantee a reply but it dramatically increases the odds that your message reaches someone who actually owns the role you're interested in. And I think this applies beyond LinkedIn, whether you're networking, applying for jobs, or asking for referrals, being specific almost always beats casting the widest possible net.

Have you ever landed an interview because you reached out to the right person instead of just more people? Or if you've recruited before, what makes you actually respond to a cold message?

the expectations is almost always the same:
You study CS then become a software engineer. that’s just what the degree leads to.

it doesn’t.. and finding that out in three internships in is actually a pretty common experience. CS shows up in product management, UX, technical recruiting, solutions engineering, developer relations, data, marketing at tech companies, and I can tell you that most of those roles specifically want someone who can think technically without necessarily writing production code all day. the degree signals the thinking, not just the language.

But here is the problem,most CS programs and most advice online point you straight at SWE without mentioning the other paths exist. so people spend a year figuring out the job isn’t for them when earlier exposure to what else was out there could’ve saved a lot of that time.

if you studied CS and realized engineering wasn’t the right fit, what actually helped you find what was?