Full Width [alt+shift+f] Shortcuts [alt+shift+k]
Sign Up [alt+shift+s] Log In [alt+shift+l]
1

I am a junior, and can't find a job - now what?

from Eliran Turgeman [alt+shift+b] in programming

“The market is tough” is something many juniors hear today. people are frustrated. graduating after 3-4 years with a CS degree is not easy. They graduate only to find out nobody wants to hire them or even move forward beyond the initial screening. I’ll be real with you. there’s a chance you are not enough. when I say you might not be enough, I don’t mean it in a “gate-keepy” way. I mean that the way you present yourself right now might not be impressive. that’s good news because you can fix it. it is not necessarily a “cosmetic” change alone, you might need to do more impressive things to present. let’s face it, if you graduated from college with a CS degree, without anything impressive to share, most chances you are doomed. the bare minimum doesn’t cut it. there are hundreds of candidates for each junior position. Note: although I only explicitly mention CS degrees, the below advice applies to bootcamp grads or self-taught devs… obviously… here are the tips make the most sense in that situation realize you are the problem - prerequisite step. (the company/recruiter is not to blame, they didn’t miss out on you because you got an auto rejection, and there are too many candidates) seek feedback & improve resume - there’s a ton of content on how to improve a resume - look it up. also, you can post your resume on linkedin, reddit, etc., and ask to get honest feedback on it. education isn’t enough - do personal projects. explain what you built, what skills you acquired, what challenges you had, and share your code. apply through friends or random people on linkedin that work where you want to apply - DM them. lower your expectations - your first job doesn’t have to be glamorous, or even pay well. get any job as a dev. seek mentorship - find someone who is a few steps ahead of you, and ask for their tailored advice for your specific situation. (I am available for questions, see here). I applied all these tips myself ~4.5 years ago. my first job as a dev was in a...
25th Jul 2024

Stay updated

Get a weekly newsletter with the top 5 articles worth reading every week.

More from Eliran Turgeman

My productivity rules

A friend asked me for some study/productivity tips, and I figured the most productive thing I can do is write a post about it. That way, it might help more people too. So here we go. Before we start, there are two things you need before any productivity advice will work: Be introspective. Be honest with yourself. My productivity rules Plan your day the night before Don’t leave decisions for your foggy, maybe lazy, morning self. Here’s the loop: wake up → review study plan → study → write down the plan for tomorrow → sleep → repeat. Check your energy during the day If you just ate and feel sleepy, don’t force deep study. Take a 30–60 minute break - nap, walk, exercise, or scroll your phone a bit, then come back refreshed. You can also take micro-breaks: finish a chapter, grab water or a piece of chocolate, and get back to it within five minutes. Don’t lie to yourself about effort Setting goals is great, but be honest about how hard you actually worked. You can check all the boxes, feel proud, and still know deep down that you took it easy. That’s fine sometimes, we all need rest days - but don’t confuse that with an intense study session. Review your day When you plan tomorrow’s tasks, reflect on today. Did you actually do what you set out to do? If not, why? Maybe your goal was too ambitious, or maybe you just spent too much time gaming. Either way, learn from it. There’s always room to improve, if the goal really matters to you. Limit distractions Put your phone on silent and out of reach. If you study on your computer, close anything that might tempt you, and even hide shortcuts to distracting apps. When I was in uni, I played a ton of League of Legends. The desktop icon was staring at me every time I opened my laptop — so I buried it under three folders. Sounds dumb, but it worked. A few more things Get good at breaking big goals into small tasks. If your goal is to pass an exam, start by mapping out all the smaller steps that’ll get you there. Spread them out over time, with a bit of buffer. Plans will change — that’s fine — but you should always know where you stand and adjust as you go. And one more time, because it’s that important: don’t lie to yourself. If you spent four hours on TikTok, felt bad, then studied a little to compensate — that’s not a “productive” day. Call it what it is. It’s okay to have those days, you’re human — just plan for them instead of pretending they didn’t happen. I believe that much of the productivity advice online includes some stupid ceremonies and whatnot, just do what you feel works for you. I think the ability to introspect, being honest with yourself and improving over time is all that matters. Take whatever breaks you need, in whatever order you want. You don’t need a fancy journal to write your tasks, open a txt file. You don’t need a perfect system, just something simple that works for you.

8th Oct 2025 • 1 votes
Fighting subscription fatigue with vibe-coding

Most people solve their subscription fatigue by canceling Netflix. I solved it by vibe-coding my own workout app instead of paying another SaaS. Two weeks ago, I decided to get serious about my workouts again and start logging them. I looked for an existing solution that has the following: create workouts log sets, reps, and weights a calendar to track consistency simple enough. Free apps were crammed with ads. Paid apps had bloated features I didn’t want. Both annoyed me. Before vibe-coding, I’d either tolerate ads or pay. Now there’s a third option - build my own. Of course, you could always build your own, but pre-vibe-coding it would take much more time to be worth it. How did I choose the vibe coding platform? I logged into loveable, base44, bolt, and wrote the following (imperfect) prompt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I want to create a personal webapp for managing my own workout routines (kind of a workout logger) I want to be able to define "workouts" - collection of exercises including sets and reps I want to be able to track which workout i did on which day - calendar view I want to be able to log the weights I did for every exercise in every set. I want my workout templates to be a simple collection of exercises that are plaintext - don't create some kind of an exercise library.. i just want to type the exercise name myself make it stateful, including a db connection to store all the relevant data. Whichever tool gave me the best first shot, I ran with. This time it was Loveable. Iterating With that one-shot starting point from loveable, I published it, and went to my first workout at the gym, all excited and ready to use what I built. First workout: I needed notes for exercises. Another: supersets. Each time I wrote it down, went home, and 15 minutes later I published a new version with loveable. After two weeks of using this app at the gym and doing tweaks, the app feels solid. On my last iteration, I added a badges/achievement page, and a github-like consistency widget that looks cool I hope will help me stay on track and be consistent. Sharing Friends wanted to try it too - the problem? I didn’t make it secured by sign-in, I thought I only need it for myself, and even if someone’s going to find this weird loveable URL, they could only see my workouts - who cares… But of course for my friends I’ll write one more prompt - and so I added Supabase auth within minutes. Final Thoughts This post isn’t about showing off my little workout logger anyone could make in a few hours prompting. It’s about how easy it is today to scratch your own itch. You build the exact features you need, when you need them. No ads, no bloat, no adapting to someone else’s UX. Just something comfortable and fun to use. It’s never been easier to bring your ideas to life, small or big.

16th Aug 2025 • 1 votes
Why sharing a redis cluster across services is asking for trouble

If there’s one pattern I’ve seen across multiple companies, from scrappy startups to big corps, that causes endless headaches, it’s this: a single cache cluster shared across services. I recently shortly wrote about my lessons from building and maintaining distributed systems at scale, and the first point that came to mind is exactly this - it starts with an excuse of simplicity, “we already have a cache cluster up and running, let’s just make this other service use it, no need for more infra”, and ends with a confused on-call engineer trying to debug which services were affected by the last keys eviction. So I want to double down on this idea and explain in more detail why it becomes a nightmare once your system scales. One eviction policy You got different services each throwing keys at the same redis cluster. A sudden spike/bug just caused a dramatic increase in cache writes - your cluster wasn’t ready for this, it hits maxmemory and now different keys are being removed based on your eviction policy. What’s the problem? there’s no isolation - service A caused the max memory, and now service B, C, D also pay the price - their keys are being removed as well from the cluster, and could affect the latency, and correctness of other flows of your system. Monitoring is harder Our metric fires up — we see a drop in hit rate on the cluster. Which service is causing it? Who’s affected? Instead of thinking about one service, you’re now mentally juggling everything across the entire system. More noise, less clarity. Although monitoring is harder, you could set up application monitors that you send once you write/read from the cache, based on the prefix of the key. potentially if you are organized and each service that uses the cluster has a unique prefix and you can easily identify between the hit rates of different prefixes - that’s great, but you have to work to get there. Debugging is harder This ties back to my first point about the eviction policy. You had 10m keys. something happend. now you got 5m. The effect on the services is really hard to trace. One service might have lost 100k keys, and you barely see a difference in its monitors, but it doesn’t mean your users are not feeling something is off, maybe today the are waiting a bit more for the page to load, but it’s not too long to hit your monitors thresholds. In that case, if you didn’t have a monitor on the cache cluster for keys eviction, you might be totally blind..”oh I see a slight latency increase here, but no monitors popped - guess all is well” So, never use a shared cache cluster? No, that’s not the lesson here. In some cases it is totally fine to use a single cache cluster. For example: You don’t really have a lot of traffic read/written to the cache so most of it is free anyway You store shared static data (for example, feature flags) Also note that some of the points I was making here against using a single cache cluster, can be somewhat mitigated by having good monitoring set in place. For example, having a defined prefix for the cache key per use-case, per service, and publishing metrics in the application level so we have observability to which type of keys (by prefix) are experiecning a low hit ratio. But on the other hand, tracking keys eviction is harder to monitor, since it’s not initiated by your system. Anyway, I hope you get the point. If you are getting started, a single cache cluster is totally fine. Otherwise, spin up another cache cluster, and sleep better at night. 🚨 Become a better software engineer. practice building real systems, get code reviews, and mentorship from senior engineers. Get started with 404skill

1st May 2025 • 1 votes
Escaping the local maxima

when i was a student, everything was simpler. grind leetcode. build projects. get an offer. i knew the salaries. i knew what “winning” looked like. it was a somewhat straight line from broke student to backend engineer at a top company. and i did it, i 10x my life in the span of 4 years. five years in. and honestly? it’s… fine. it’s more than fine. but it also feels like i’m stuck on a plateau. the growth feels logarithmic. the peak that isn’t the peak things are good, but i can’t stop feeling like i want more, even though i am comfortable. i look back at the student version of me, and i see hunger. direction. i look at me now and i see someone who’s tried a bunch of things: built products that barely anyone used started a newsletter, got some nice traffic, but it didn’t stick thinking about podcasts, courses, maybe a dev agency? dreaming of 10x-ing my life again, but not sure where to invest my time. when i was younger, the path was obvious. now it’s all vague, i could do anything. do i go all-in on indie hacking? live off my rsu’s for a few years and just build? try again with another product? double down on the blog? start a podcast? well, the next level doesn’t seem to come with an instructions book. escaping means risking the fall as a cs student you learn that escaping a local maxima usually means exploring a few downs to find a higher maxima. well, applying it to life is scary. what if i lose everything i worked hard to build? i am no longer a student living off of scholarships, i have more obligations. and also, the scariest part of all is what if this is the best it gets? i prefer to be positive and believe there’s another jump out there. something worth building. something that might actually shift my trajectory again. i just haven’t found it yet. but i’m looking. 🚨 Become a better software engineer. practice building real systems, get code reviews, and mentorship from senior engineers. Get started with 404skill

5th Apr 2025 • 1 votes
On over-engineering; Architecture Edition

I recently wrote about over-engineering and striking a good balance between making your code “too” future-proof and not making it future-proof at all. Some time later, I realized it was missing a critical perspective. I hadn’t addressed over-engineering from an architectural point of view, so this post is dedicated precisely to that. Let’s talk about a decision I made for Collecto, my side project. Collecto is still in its early stages, and like most early-stage projects, its future is uncertain. It could grow into something big—or not. That’s where architectural decisions get tricky. You don’t want to overengineer and waste time, but you also don’t want to under-engineer and regret not laying a solid foundation. So what’s the problem? Collecto is a forms-backend service, meaning it handles the creation, management, and processing of forms data for applications. I wanted to add the ability to send emails on certain events. For example, when a new user signs up for your form, you might want to send them a welcome email. The simplest solution? I could write a new service responsible for sending emails and call it directly wherever needed— for example, right after a user signup is saved to the database. This approach works, is easy to set up, and introduces no additional overhead. However, it results in tight coupling, making future changes more challenging. If tomorrow I want to also send a notification to the form owner when they receive a new subscription, I would have to keep adding more responsibilities to the form service code. This bloats the core service, which should ideally focus solely on CRUD operations for forms. On the other end of the spectrum, I could go all-in and build a distributed pub/sub system with a service bus like RabbitMQ or Azure Service Bus. This would give me scalability, decoupling, and all the good stuff. But it’s also a massive investment in time and complexity for a project that doesn’t need it, yet. I didn’t like both options, so I looked for a 3rd alternative and found MediatR which is a mediator pattern implementation in .NET. Why MediatR is a good middle-ground? MediatR facilitates communication between different parts of the application without them needing to reference each other directly. Instead of invoking methods directly, you can send requests or publish notifications, allowing registered handlers to respond accordingly. This approach maintains loose coupling, making the system easier to maintain and evolve. At the same time, it doesn’t introduce the overhead of managing infrastructure like a service bus or message queue. Everything stays in-process, simple, and fast. One of the primary reasons I chose MediatR is its simplicity. Implementing communication patterns with MediatR is straightforward and requires minimal configuration. Compared to a full-fledged service bus, MediatR demands a much smaller time investment and eliminates operational overhead such as monitoring queues or scaling message brokers. It can’t be all sunshines and rainbows MediatR has a few cons compared to other out-of-process messaging brokers, for example Events are in-process only. If your application crashes, you lose the events. There’s no out of the box retry mechanism for failed event handlers. If you deploy multiple instances of Collecto, MediatR won’t distribute events across them. Bottom line Architecture isn’t about perfection—it’s about trade-offs. MediatR worked for Collecto because it gave me a decoupled, flexible way to handle events without the overhead of a service bus. It wasn’t the simplest solution, but it was the right one for where the project is today. The next time you’re making an architectural decision, remember this: the best solution isn’t the most impressive or complex—it’s the one that solves your problem now while leaving room for growth later. 🚨 Become a better software engineer. practice building real systems, get code reviews, and mentorship from senior engineers. Get started with 404skill

10th Dec 2024 • 1 votes

More in programming

If people would just

Building systems that incentivise good behaviour

5 hours ago • 1 votes
BazelCon 2026 recap

My now-traditional “summary” of the conference along with my own commentary and thoughts.

yesterday • 1 votes
The Future of CSS ✨

Every year, browser vendors collaborate via the Interop project to synchronize their efforts on new HTML/CSS/JS features. This year, there’s a ton of super exciting features being considered! In this blog post, we’ll explore the CSS of the future, to get a glimpse of what we’ll soon be able to do.

2 days ago • 1 votes
Speeding up code review with `small-change`

Imprint’s average engineer is merging 4x more PRs than 2 years ago. Yay. Aggregated behind the average is something even more interesting: we have two teams that are merging 10x their PRs over that period. One engineer is merging 25x the PRs per week of our average engineer two years ago, and a number are merging 10x. That’s pretty neat, and the slope of the line suggests our average in a year is going to look much closer to today’s p90 than today’s p50. Even more importantly, we aren’t just shipping more, our quality has improved: incidents are down 42% half-over-half, and critical incidents are down 78% half-over-half. I think we’ve always known the quality/velocity tradeoff wasn’t a particularly useful construct, but that’s undeniable today. As we’ve walked this path, we–like everyone else progressing down it–have run into the problem of pull request review. The p50 pull request review took about 33 minutes to complete 2 years ago, but now takes us about 77 minutes. The slope here correlates tightly with the number of pull requests getting merged. Tightly enough that addressing it became one of my priorities for the week. We solved it! Just kidding, we’ve absolutely not solved it, but I think our current approach is an interesting one, which we call the small-change. The work discussed here was shaped and done by many folks at Imprint including Dan, Joy, Daniel, Lenny, Taylor, Ted, and Annie, among many others. Why review pull requests? There are four reasons we review pull requests: Knowledge sharing between author and reviewer – software engineering is generally learned via apprenticeship, and reviews are a primary mechanism of experienced engineers teaching others what good software looks like. We believe the current volume means that this knowledge sharing will have to move towards operating on clusters of pull requests, rather than individual pull requests Preventing errors – review has always been an expensive time to catch errors, and we believe that effective CICD along with harness verification techniques like poteto’s pstack are more effective mechanisms for preventing errors than review Preventing malicious behavior – my experience is that even careful code review will generally miss competent malicious behavior, although fortunately most malicious behavior is incompetent. We believe both sorts of behavior are best identified using a combination of fixed rules (modifying these specific objects/classes/files requires review), anti-abuse mechanisms that we’ve refined in our LLM-based member support experiences, auditing, and audit log inspection Compliance obligations in our documented controls – these can be changed, but today they require that an independent human reviews changes in a subset of our repositories In the modern development paradigm, we think there is a better solution for each of these problems. But, we also want to make these changes very cautiously. Small steps with small-change We believe we move fast by finding narrow, contained ways to validate new practices, so to iterate our way into an effective solution, we’ve developed the concept of a small-change. Here’s how it works: When a pull request is marked ready, CICD determines whether it is eligible to be a small-change. This is represented as a passing Github check. There is also a label for visibility, but it is the check itself, managed by the build and not human modifiable, that determines eligibility. (The label is used for initial filtering, but the check is still independently verified.) Something is a small-change if it meets all of these criteria: It is less than 1,000 lines of code There are no p1 or p2 findings from our ai-code-review automated review bot The author has “experience” in the service or application, defined as 10+ prior merged pull requests into that service or application’s directories. For changes working across multiple services or applications, the author must have experience in all of them to qualify Impacts fewer than N distinct services or applications. N is 1 on our frontend monorepo, and N is 3 in our backend monorepo, where typical changes will modify both a gRPC service and a common HTTP gateway Shared libraries and utilities files are not eligible for small-change Each repository has a .small_change file which allows per-path customization while we continue to tune the behaviors. For example, a service dealing with money movement can be excluded Our Slack automation tags every reference to a pull request with reacji labeling the state of that pull request, for example if it has failing tests, if it has been approved but tests are still running, or if it is ready to merge. We added a small-change reacji that indicates which of those pull requests meet the small-change criteria In our internal skills repository, we created two skills that have been distributed across harnesses: review-small-change which takes a list of repositories and reviews all open, non-draft, small-changes, including providing approval if they meet the review’s criteria (all checks pass including small-change check, and not touching on sensitive topics such as payments and security) review-pr-cluster which reviews batches of pull requests to identify common themes that came up, and suggest opportunities for discussion and adding verifications We set the social expectation that any error caused by a small-change is a failure in our system, and has to be solved at the system level: improvements to ai-code-review, to our verification mechanisms, to our CICD, to our harness, etc. This took about two days of infrequent attention to implement and rollout, although I imagine we will be tuning the knobs here for a long time. Maybe forever. fleet: centrally orchestrated harness I’ll briefly mention our other approach to reducing code review volume, which anchors on our centrally-orchestrated harness, fleet. (Which is similar to Stripe’s Minions although not following the one-shot approach in particular). We rely on fleet to implement and verify software in a highly controlled harness running in the cloud, with independent evaluation mechanisms to identify the correct number of independent reviewers for any given change. That number can be as low as one (e.g. fleet writes, one human reviews) for changes evaluated as safe. Results / next steps / reception I’ll be honest, it’s too early to give a useful result here. From early results, about 10% of changes qualify as a small-change. Those are now eligible for very fast approval, and generally get it unless they trip a flag, generally due to touching a security or money adjacent topic. While 10% is a small percentage, the core concept here is working, and ultimately will succeed or fail based on our ability to expand that percentage over the next few months in tandem with expanding our verification mechanisms to be increasingly comprehensive. This is ultimately going to fail or succeed depending on our ability to improve our verifications, which does require more difficult sorts of techniques to accomplish in low scale-complexity, high domain-complexity software than in the high scale-complexity, low domain-complexity products where many techniques like incremental rollouts are exceptionally effective. (Don’t get me wrong, they still work, they just provide less coverage when most users have different configuration and behavior.) Folks have not been uniformly excited about this, it’s a substantial change from how we’ve learned to be good engineers, and it’s uncomfortable to reevaluate whether a long-held best practice has become merely dogma. The most energizing part of the current cycle is that we get to reevaluate these practices we grew up on every week; the most painful part of the current cycle is that we’re likely to fall behind if we ever stop reevaluating them.

5 days ago • 1 votes
Building a Chestnut Launcher

The park near my house has lots of chestnuts and my kids have been collecting them like crazy (it’s actually their favorite post-school activity). We accumulated quite a hoard. I thought it would be fun to make a launcher so we had something to do with our new chestnut collection. I wanted to go with a very simple crossbow-style design (like the famous D2 item) using latex tubing and a leather pouch for holding the chestnuts. This is what I came up with. It launches chestnuts about 220 feet, and it’s simple enough to build in an afternoon. The frame is a 42 inch 2x2 and a spare IKEA bed slat for the crossbeam, glued and screwed together. A 3/8 inch eye bolt goes through each end of the crossbeam, and the latex tubing is tied to those and to the pouch from a leather shepherd’s sling. Tying the tubing was the fiddliest part. It has to be stretched while you wrap it with butcher’s twine, so I clamped a couple of scrap blocks to my workbench to hold it. I like this design because the tubing can be wrapped around the eye bolts to easily add more tension and power. The Trigger My favorite part of the design was that I decided to use an archery release like this one for the trigger. It provides a safe and reliable way to hold the tubing back, and it’s made to let go cleanly. I 3D printed a little housing that mounts the release securely to the back of the stock, and the release clips onto a loop of archery D-loop cord on the back of the pouch. Then I added a dowel for a rear grip and an old handle I had previously removed from my shop vac. How Well Does It Work? We tried it at the park and it works surprisingly well. Aimed at about 35 to 40 degrees, it sends our chestnuts (on the small side, about 10 to 15 grams) about 220 feet. Thanks to the archery release, we haven’t had a single misfire. I got curious and did some rough math. To go that far with air drag, the chestnuts are leaving at somewhere around 85 to 100 mph, which works out to about the same energy as a paintball. So safety glasses are important and you never point it at anyone. You can find the 3D print on Printables and a full build guide on Instructables. Make sure to always use it with adult supervision :)

5 days ago • 1 votes
📚 BoredReading

You seem to be enjoying this.

Join free to unlock everything.

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in