Career

I'm hiring! For a pretty fun job, if you ask me. Talk to some of the most interesting teams and companies across the globe, understand what they do, then explain this to fellow software engineers. Full-remote, flexible €150+/$175+ per hour Details: https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/tech-industry-analyst-2026/…

BREAKING: Within the past 72 hours: - Apple's AI Chief steps down - Apple's Head of UI Design leaves to Meta - Apple's Policy Chief steps down - Apple's Head of General Counsel steps down

A friend in China recently asked me how to improve her English. She’d struggled with it for years as a student, labeled herself “bad at languages,” and now wanted to try again for her career. But she couldn’t sustain her efforts. I asked how she’d been studying. She said she bought grammar books, pronunciation guides, vocabulary lists, and tried to memorize them. Why? “Because I need to start from the basics and learn systematically.” There it was. Even years after leaving school, she still had the student mindset. The education system had brainwashed her into thinking learning must be systematic, bottom-up, textbook-driven. I told her: This is no way to learn as an adult. Instead, find content in English you’re already interested in. Decipher it with dictionaries and AI tools. Learn vocabulary from that content. Define the “job to be done” for English—a tool for communication and understanding—and work backwards. What are you trying to understand? Read that. Make that your textbook. As adults, we need to do a 180-degree reversal of how we learned as students. In school, you start with foundations and work upward. You won’t apply what you learn until years later. But the basics are also the most boring. If you try to learn this way as an adult, you’ll quit. Adults should do the opposite: Start with a real-world problem. Figure out what knowledge you need. Then go backwards to learn it. AI accelerates this dramatically. It’s a 24/7 world-class tutor that answers any question, as long as you know what to ask. I experienced this myself when trying to become more technical. A few years ago, I wanted to learn coding, so I watched intro CS lectures. I got bored fast. I couldn’t connect the content to anything I needed in real life. This year, I started using AI coding tools like Google AI Studio, Replit, and Cursor. I described my product ideas in plain language, and they turned into working products in minutes. Every time an idea became real, I felt elated, empowered. Before, screens of code gave me headaches. They reminded me of my inadequacy. Now, I saw code as just a tool to achieve my goals. I asked AI to walk me through the codebase structure, the languages and technologies, what each file did, how everything connected. I had it add detailed comments everywhere. After a few projects, I’d learned more about coding than a year of college CS lectures. It wasn’t “systematic.” But I’m not trying to become an engineer. I’m trying to become technically literate so I can use code as a tool. Why this reversal? • Students’ full-time job is learning. Adults have other jobs and responsibilities. After a long day at work, who has the energy for boring lectures? • Students must learn. The system forces accountability: exams, homework, class attendance. Adults learn purely by choice. Nobody forces you. This means sustainable learning requires intrinsic motivation. If it’s boring, you quit. • Students have defined goals. Do well on exams. Adults must define their own goals. Otherwise, you lose motivation fast. The common thread: Sustaining motivation is the key to learning anything as an adult. Because you’re not going to learn overnight. So if you’re trying to learn something, start with a problem or project. Figure out the job to be done. Work backwards. Learning becomes fun. Learning becomes sustainable. Forget “learn first, do later.” Do first, learn later. You don’t get good and then produce output. You produce output and then get good.

One year from now, you'll either be complaining that you never got started or celebrating all that you've done. The choice is yours.

Man how lucky are millennial devs, just as we’re getting too old and tired for this job, all the tedium gets magically removed and there’s an amplifier that makes all of our knowledge 1000x more useful (and necessary)

Just published the latest @a16z Build newsletter - our weekly roundup of exciting startup opportunities and founders to build with. Featuring open roles at @Waymo, @zipline, @vercel, @cursor_ai, and @Revolut - and with founders like @bspellacy, @8ennett, @joeygrassia, @BaijuBhatt, @ml_angelopoulos, @hollympeck, @thaiscbranco_, @sarahookr, @kylemathews, @davidmytton, and others. Time to build https://a16zbuild.substack.com/p/waymo-zipline-and-the-co-founder…

Tech Twitter is wild... you can meet someone who changes your entire career. Let’s connect.

OpenAI Residency 2026 applications are OPEN btw - 6-month full-time paid research gig in SF - ~$220K annualized ($18.3K/month) + relocation - NO prior ML/AI experience required, just strong technical fundamentals & fast learning - Work on frontier AI with top researchers Interviews starts in Jan 2026 Apply: https://openai.com/careers/residency-2026-san-francisco/…

Google's ex-CEO Eric Schmidt talks about how his whole early life was basically coding, and how AI just wiped it out. He says in his 20s all he wanted to do was write programs, all the way through college and grad school, and that this is what built his career. But now, every single thing he learned back then can be done by AI. "Each and every one of you has a supercomputer and superprogrammer in your pocket." --- From 'Institute of Politics Harvard Kennedy School' YT channel

I am not sure if other developers feel like this. But I feel kinda depressed. Like everyone else, I have been using Claude code (for a while, it’s not a recent thing lol). And it’s incredible. I have never found coding more fun. The stuff you can do and the speed you can do it at now. Is absolutely insane. And I’m using it to ship a lot. And solve customer problems faster. So all around it’s a win. But at the same time. The skill I spent 10,000s of hours getting good at. Programming. The thing I spent most of my life getting good at. Is becoming a full commodity extremely quickly. As much fun as it is. And as much as I like using the tools. There’s something disheartening about the thing you spent most of your life getting good at. Now being mostly useless.

have a feeling that the right thing to build if you’re an ambitious and talented young person is no longer a “software company”

never say career break or unemployed just slap one of these stealth startups on your resume tackle any question with "NDA"

The fastest way to feel behind is to measure your chapter 1 against someone else's chapter 20.

I have never relied on traditional interview processes to get a job. No DSA rounds, no system design grilling, no multi-step loops. Almost every role I have landed came through a single conversation focused entirely on the projects I had built. The reason is simple: proof of work makes interviews optional. I didn’t come from a big name college. There was no built-in reputation attached to where I studied, and no advantage from well known tags like IIT, GSOC, or Big Tech internships. Those signals help - they make it easier for someone to assume you are capable. Since I didn’t have those signals, I had to create my own. My approach was to build things consistently and put them out into the world. Over time, that body of work became my credibility. Every job I have gotten has followed the same pattern: Merkle Science One conversation. No coding tests. We talked about the projects I had built in college and how I approached solving problems. My second job (AI infra company). Again, just a couple of calls. The discussion centered around my previous work and the systems I had built. My current projects, my work on Water, is what opened the door. The project itself did the heavy lifting. In every case, employers evaluated me based on what I had already built, not how well I remembered algorithms. The only consistent strategy I have followed is building things that interested me. Not all of them were complex, but they were all real. FitMe — fitness assistant using pose detection (later published in IEEE) VirtueX — virtual try-on system using a laptop camera TigerDB — a simple key-value database created to understand database internals CricLang — a toy programming language built while exploring compilers Water - a multi-agent orchestration framework built purely out of curiosity These are just a few of the projects I have built. I have built many more projects that are not listed here. None of these were built for interviews. They were built because I wanted to understand how things worked. That curiosity produced a track record that employers could evaluate directly. One thing people often miss: building is only half of it. If your work isn’t visible, it can’t help you. You don’t need to be loud, but you need to be present: • Share what you’re building • Explain how it works • Show your progress • Post your learnings You don’t need viral posts. You just need to put your work where it can be seen by the right people. This is how I ended up with opportunities — not by optimizing for interviews, but by consistently publishing my work. Proof of work gives people: • A clear signal of your skills • Evidence of your ability to execute • Insight into how you think • Confidence that you can deliver These are stronger signals than a single interview round or a competitive exam score. ## Conclusion You don’t need elite credentials to stand out. You need a track record. If you consistently build and share your work: People will know what you’re capable of Opportunities will come through conversations, not assessments You won’t need to “perform” in traditional interview formats Everything meaningful in my career so far has come from this simple principle: Build real things. Share them. Let the work speak. You can read more such pieces from me on https://manthanguptaa.in/

ai just made you ordinary. can you still win? most people who’ll lose their jobs to ai won’t lose because they were stupid, lazy, or incompetent, but purely because they kept sharpening their sword in a world that had already moved to rifles. you see, for a long time, intelligence worked for us. if you were sharper than the people around you, if you knew more about things, if you could catch patterns easily, money followed. doors opened up. people listened to you. ai didn’t kill the intelligence ceiling. it anal-fucked it. intelligence is now everywhere. you’re one tap away from summoning an oracle that knows more than any single person ever could, can go into incredible depth on almost anything, and do it much faster. you’d think “upskilling” could maybe give you an edge here. trying out new ai tools, frameworks, skills. everyone learning the same thing at the same time and calling it an edge. i can do the funniest thing here. i can tell you that learning ai is the way forward. actually, wait, let me correct myself. the only way forward. i can show you your career’s death, then the aftermath, then sell you peace of mind today for a future you have no control over, in the form of an “ai upskilling course.” many of you will buy that course. not because you’re dumb, but because fear loves anything that looks like a checklist. this is what insurance companies do. fear for hope works every time. or i could tell you to find your safe camp. safe camp 1: doctor, ca, lawyer, therapist. titles that require professional licenses to practice, and are somewhat protected by law, regulation, and institutions. safe camp 2: plumbing, carpentry, hvac, welding. work that requires physical skill, where ai is too expensive to take over, yet. both safe camps optimize for survival. but neither guarantees total protection from being replaced over a longer horizon, say two decades from now. but a tiny minority still exists, and will continue to exist. the minority that will also have access to the same tools you do, but whose work will not feel interchangeable. these are the people who will win with ai, not against it. do not mistake these people for being necessarily louder or smarter. they’re just choosing fewer things, making stranger combinations, and taking decisions that, to an observer, make no sense. yet somehow, they win. if i were to decode this strange pattern and give you a single attribute that makes this possible, it’s called taste. taste is not limited to preference, vibes, or aesthetics. it’s the ability to look at a million options and say, “this one matters. everything else does not.” it’s judgment that sits close to intuition. the difference is that taste can be developed, refined, and tuned over time, while intuition has no clear framework. you can already see this in the real world. why do some creators thrive while thousands using the same tools disappear? why do some founders ship products that feel obvious in hindsight? why do some writers feel irreplaceable even when ai can write a thousand words a minute like it’s nothing? it’s not output volume. it’s that they already know what to build, what to ignore (important), and when to stop. this is also why resisting ai is a dead end. moralizing, dooming, or opting out by calling it a fad is pure denial. the only two guaranteed outcomes of resistance are this: ai will not wait for your comfort, and the winners won’t be the ones who reject it. i’m sorry if these ideas make you uneasy. i’m well aware that “learning more tools,” “stacking more skills,” and “copying playbooks” are the go-to advice of anyone who claims to help you safeguard yourself from ai. i’m betting my money on taste and individuality in its truest sense. build judgment. develop a seductive taste. expose yourself to extremes and startling depth. be aggressive in your use of ai, but never blind. this is war. but one where the losers will be the loudest. the winners won’t be. they’ll just have taste.

I’m incredibly energized to announce that I’ve joined @generalcatalyst as their Creative Director It’s an honor to be trusted to hold this position by @htaneja, @jcfurstenberg, and the entire GC Famiglia I had the opportunity to spend a lot of time with incredible folks across our industry during my break. But the ambition that General Catalyst has to tackle huge problems, is simply unnatural. There’s so much work to do to show the story of the immense world being built here. But I couldn’t imagine doing anything else right now. It would be absolutely foolish to not thank the many people that spent time supporting me during this time. So here’s a list of thank yous: @gaby_goldberg @seanxthielen @menemazarakis @thecpe @tamarawinter @marannelson @pythianism @janehk @cokiehasiotis @jacksondahl @nabeelqu @EmilyHerrera @DevinLewtan @bryce @soleio and I’m sure there’s others I’m forgetting who had a huge impact on me during this time And most importantly, my very offline Wife whom I’m nothing without *bonus first day of work fit yesterday

Not long ago, someone I had just met (an acquaintance I barely knew) asked me to introduce them to someone important in my network. > “Hey, can you introduce me to this person? I saw you're connected on LinkedIn. Thanks!” It really irritated me. I wasn’t sure why at first. I love helping people and making introductions. I usually do it instinctively. But something about this one felt off. Maybe it was how they phrased it, or maybe it was how casually they assumed I’d say yes. So I started thinking more about relationships, specifically, the difference between transactional and non-transactional ones, and how social capital plays a role. I wanted to dig into why some asks feel generous and easy, while others feel like a withdrawal from an account that was never funded in the first place. Around the same time, I came across an article called Dissecting Social Capital, which frankly inspired much of this piece and got me thinking even more. In this article, I’ll break down the theory of social capital, building trust with others in your community, and how to make sure you’re leaving every interaction with the right impression. Whether you realize it or not, every conversation is either earning you trust or costing you. Don't make the mistakes most people do. ## What is Social Capital? First, it's important to understand what social capital is. The cleanest definition I’ve seen is that it’s the accumulated goodwill, reputation, and trust you’ve built up with other people. You earn social capital by being helpful, generous, dependable, and credible. You build social capital when you help a friend land their dream job by making an introduction, prepping them for interviews, and helping them negotiate the offer, without expecting anything in return. You earn their trust, and they see you in a more positive light, which later on can be translated into reciprocity. You become someone they want to help back someday. Social capital behaves a lot like financial capital. It has three key traits: • Productive – you can convert social capital into productive benefits like introductions, favors, and even financial capital. • Durable – it retains value over time, but can also erode without maintenance • Flexible – it can be substituted for other forms of capital and be used across different benefits At the end of the day, social capital is a tangible way to measure the breadth and depth of your relationships. ## “Transactional” Relationships When people describe someone as transactional, they’re often thinking of a situation like the one I shared at the start – someone asking for a favor the moment you meet them. But here’s the truth: all relationships are transactional. Every relationship operates under a social contract between two people, though the nature of those contracts can vary. What most people label as “transactional” typically refers to relationships where the terms are explicit and conditional. Take an employer-employee relationship: the employer pays a salary, and the employee performs a defined role. The expectations are clear. There’s a direct exchange. Contrast that with a more implicit agreement, like the one between close friends. Nothing is written down, but the unspoken understanding is mutual support, trust, and time. The “contract” is looser, but still present. ## Building Trust Let’s say you just met someone and purely saw them as a means to an end – someone who can get you a job, introduce you to an investor, or promote your business. You’d probably make the ask regardless of what it might cost them or how little trust you’ve built. You’d act more transactionally. Now invert it. You meet someone you genuinely want to build a long-term relationship with over decades. You respect them and believe the lifetime value of the relationship is worth more than any short-term gain. You’d probably be more cautious and wait before asking for anything. You’d focus on building trust first. > There's something slightly paradoxical in most human relationships: people generally don't like making explicit the underlying transactional structure of relationships, but this structure is revealed when people fail to appreciate the principle of reciprocity that relationships are built on.— Vaishnav Sunil from Optima & Outliers That’s why the example I shared at the beginning irritated me. It signaled that this person saw me as a shortcut to their goal, not a human worth investing in. ## Playing Long-Term Games So how do you build social capital? You treat every relationship like it’s going to last for decades. You play long-term games with long-term people. - Build the well. Do things before people ask. Help them solve problems, share opportunities, and connect dots, even when there’s no immediate benefit to you. Build your well long before you need water. - Make introductions thoughtfully. Making an introduction is the easiest way to add value to people's lives. What takes you a minute could result in a decade of value for two other people. - Use the barbell strategy. Keep in touch with small, consistent check-ins – quick messages, reactions to wins, or sending something thoughtful. Then, occasionally, spend deep, quality time together. - Build long-term credibility. Do things that get others to say positive things about you when you're not in the room. - Don’t ask for a favor too early. Or you're signaling that you want to play short-term games. - Think in decades. What would you do differently if this person were around for the next 40 years? One last thing: some people can brute-force relationships with charisma. They charm their way into rooms and win people over with their energy to make asks. While that might work in the short term, in the long term, I always believe that relationships are built on a mutually beneficial, reciprocal nature.

If you have multiple interests, don't let anyone convince you that you should narrow your focus. You may be confused for a while, but if you stick it out, you will blow past everyone else.

The great surprise of the technical and financial requirements being removed from coding and video creation is that all the same people are doing it—and that there hasn’t been an explosion of new software builders and filmmakers. After a decade of the media telling us that the most glamorous life is entrepreneur, filmmaker, or short-form video influencer: no one new jumps at the opportunity when the primary obstacles are removed.

Skills are just markdown files but will 10x your workflow