The Double-Edged Sword

It increasingly feels as though nobody wants to hire freshers anymore, as the job that they once did can now be automated via an agent call, and the weekly refresh of tokens that Anthropic does to promote the new feature they drop twice a month does not help.

Feeling stranded is not a new feeling, but the entire landscape being shifted with each new announcement from the "Saviors of Humanity" companies is just too much stimulation for someone who is just starting out in the tech world.

But as someone who is trying to build his career in AI, I am facing the reality of how success is a culmination of hard work and opportunity. Working towards the goal is possible only in the environment that allows you to grow, making you close the distance between yourself and the goal.

But the current recruitment phase in the AI domain has become a double-edged sword.

The so-called big companies are too rigid in their hiring processes, and even though they have resources, they do not take the risk of research and development through actually creating talent in-house. Thus, in this space, the startups are the greatest risk-takers but also those who are most benefitted if their bets pay off. They are the ones who are already taking the risk, believing in an idea, betting against a market that is always clinging to its past, trying to build a product that can do real impact in the world.

Recruitment in startups can be said to be merit-based, where the talented can open that particular door by impressing the founders and tech leads, but what if there is potential but no concrete skills that are immediately deployable? Will they be willing to basically take potential candidates and then grow them into the engineers that solve real-world complex problems, someone who becomes a pillar of support in their collective journey towards achieving their goal?

It is true that we can't just bet on concepts and theories; in the end, only the results matter. One cannot hire a person because he writes a really nice blog or has a very cool project that has yet to become big. The type of person and the energy he brings to the table is a crucial factor that cannot be measured from an ATS score.

The diversity that gives the energy also contains the tension, as ideas collide between strong-minded people. The vibe and rhythm of a team are not just abstract concepts but real implications of how well-coordinated and motivated the team is. And maybe startups are not inclined towards this risk because they already have enough on their plate, and thus make exceptions for the exceptional ones.

If "Ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas. So in the end, I guess we can agree there has to be a test of merit, a threshold that a candidate has to meet, but whether he is given the opportunity to prove himself is the more important question I would ask.

I mean, do the most daring group of individuals dare to wield this double-edged sword?