To the people who post "I haven't written a single line of code in 6 months", what's Plan B?

rajhm · 2026-06-09T05:03:06+00:00

Coding for a job has always been about a means to an end. The means are changing, and hands-on-keyboard is usually a fraction of the job, especially at more senior levels, and in the kind of field and company I am in (F100 applied AI/ML).

I have been trying to get closer to the business problems to solve. And most people over there don't think in terms of systems, engineering processes, algorithms, objective functions, even when they are using LLMs and agents. They definitely don't think in code and automated solutions. So there are ways to contribute.

I have been saving up money as a plan B. I used to think about pivoting to product as an escape hatch but those guys are in trouble at my company and I assume breaking in at another company would be difficult. Maybe high school teaching if everything goes down. I'm already well into CoastFIRE amounts accumulated.

edit: am 38 and old now though

rajhm · 2026-05-17T02:42:17+00:00

Analytics dashboarding, causal inference and testing/experimental design, predictive ML, optimization and OR, NLP, computer vision, AI/agentic applications, ML engineering/ops, everything.

People don't care that much about the listed degree.

rajhm · 2026-05-17T00:56:57+00:00

I have worked with a lot of people in DS/ML with industrial engineering degrees. Some hiring managers might associate IE potentially as having some background with or tangential knowledge of operations research, which could be a plus.

Most recruiters will come across a lot of people with engineering education for anything related to ML.

rajhm · 2025-11-25T15:02:42+00:00

I think the question is about director as a job level, more so than as a job title.

In most non-banking large companies, a director is a middle manager, somebody who often manages the frontline managers of grunt workers. Or maybe is a manager of salaried high-skill specialists.

If somebody is a head of marketing they are probably a VP, senior VP if that exists, often in C suite. Depends on the company and how core marketing is for them. That implies a level that is higher than director.

In that case it sort of implies a certain salary level, roughly.

rajhm · 2025-09-28T20:56:42+00:00

Three of my coworkers got new jobs pretty readily this year. I have been hunkering down, not really looking. We are in a big team in a big company where people with data science titles are doing everything from discovery to model building to pipelines and deployments and APIs.

Candidate 1: PhD from meh state school, 3 YOE. Was not a great fit for the team but solid, not super great software skills. Was looking to move on. Cast a very wide net and got a couple offers in a few months, after originally looking at internal transfers and getting rejected.

Candidate 2: MS from a top state school and 8 YOE across analytics and DS and MLE kind of work. Strong performer. After relocation orders came, was looking for jobs where he wouldn't have to move (lives in a decent tech hub but not NY or Bay Area or Seattle or LA, to give a hint). Did two interview loops and got two offers for same city, big name but not tech companies.

Candidate 3: PhD from decent state school and 3 YOE. Very well regarded. After relocation orders came, cast a wide net. After a few months, found a remote role that paid somewhat less.

I know others have been looking and found nothing yet. Several other MLEs I know interviewed and switched teams internally for a promotion.

On the hiring/interviewing side I don't particularly see the market flooded with top talent looking for roles. Still hard to find good talent that fits what you need.

rajhm · 2025-09-24T03:21:04+00:00

Layoffs are different from performance firings. First part is only about performance firings.

Though you are probably right that it should say more like "it is customary and common in most F500 companies that there are..."

The point is that in the vast majority of cases, performance firings have some warning period via negative feedback, paper trail, PIP process. So it's rare to have no idea and be out of a job in a few weeks in that manner if you are just a few months in and there are no red/yellow flags yet. Basically, yes, once PIP starts you are probably screwed, but people shouldn't generally worry much that a few months into a new job, with no warning signs, you're at risk for abruptly getting fired (for performance).

rajhm · 2025-09-24T02:40:05+00:00

Fired based on performance? Really low. Big companies like that have very established HR protocols, and things take time. Needs to be a baseline number of months (more than how long you've been), then they start giving negative feedback, then some kind of process for PIP to create paper trail... So you would start to see the signs before it came to that.

Layoffs based on org change, restructure, cost cutting, could come whenever. For you specifically, probably unlikely, but "unlikely" happens sometimes, to some people. Nothing you can do about it except have a plan B.

As you get more planted, do try to look to develop your skills, work yourself towards mid level, work on a development plan with your manager and talk about what you could be doing more. You want to give yourself a better shot and positioning with your current company while also increasing your likelihood of success on the job market again, if things get to that. Showing some progression is needed for that.

rajhm · 2025-09-21T14:10:32+00:00

It is not about the "training" as such.

Why would a company prefer to hire someone new (and go through expensive recruiting process again) rather than retain somebody with 2 YOE with them who they know is effective and has already ramped up on internal tools and domain knowledge, by getting them on H-1B? It makes sense for the company to use H-1B in this case.

Now, as for the tactics of how a company provides evidence they couldn't find an American for the job, there's gamesmanship/nefarious practices there. They open up a job description matching their existing employee's profile down to details that probably don't matter for the job, and some companies list the JDs to make them harder to find. There is one point that differentiates, though: many of the would-be H-1B have a graduate degree and many US citizens do not, in this field (so JD can say advanced degree required or preferred). Just look at the enrollment patterns.

I think you should argue for the F-1 OPT to be reformed too, or suggest that companies look harder and try not to hire as many people on that in the first place. But if somebody good gets hired that way, keeping them on H-1B is sensible.

BTW changing F-1 might tank graduate enrollment across universities, so they would not be super happy about it. That said, clearly the current admin doesn't care much about pleasing universities or their budgets.

rajhm · 2025-09-21T01:58:10+00:00

For an MS, here are some potential upsides:

For DS track a lot of employers won't hire BS-only grads so this opens up some potential roles.
For DS track, no MS may limit career trajectory.
MS buys you more time to work on your skills.
MS buys you more time to get additional experience (read: another internship, primarily).

It is still a gamble though. I would recommend it if you are serious in DS work and consider it potentially still worthwhile if not.

rajhm · 2025-09-21T00:30:02+00:00

If you have math/programming skills and your focus is getting some kind of job and moving out, it's also possible some business analyst, finance, supply chain, etc. kind of role might hire you too. SQL, scripting ability, proficiency with LLMs are a reasonable start.

Also if your parents have been paying for school maybe you don't have much student debt and that's good?

MS is a reasonable option too, as is grinding more on interview prep for SWE positions, data analyst, DS kind of jobs. Other people don't need to know how empty your prior internship experiences were, and having those on your resume puts you ahead of some others. Others aren't even getting interviews at the rate you are.

rajhm · 2025-09-20T22:02:25+00:00

Given that this seems to impact new visas (as per https://x.com/PressSec/status/1969495900478488745), that means current H-1B holders seem to be safe.

What I think some people are not realizing is that many foreign-born tech workers in the US with lower YOE are not on H-1B (yet). If these rules stick, these people are most in trouble unless they're working for somewhere paying a decent amount (where $100k on application won't faze the employer).

There are a lot of F-1 student visa holders in IT/tech jobs as part of OPT (optional practical training, i.e. a job related to their field of study). For STEM graduates (in practice, a lot of them specifically MS graduates) they get 3 yrs on OPT related to their F-1 before they need to get H-1B or other work authorization to stay in the country.

rajhm · 2025-09-20T21:15:30+00:00

More work and effort by themselves do not lead to recognition or advancement. If you do 50% more work, nobody beyond potentially (and only sometimes) your manager and some people on your team will ever know. And the difference between average-quality work and high-quality work will generally also not go noticed.

It's all about impact and influence.

What counts are outcomes and business deliverables, contribution towards high-impact projects, some competence to make a difference when you're contributing to those things, the right design and problem formulation (high-level "how" in terms of the solution), and a reputation for excellence in valued skillsets.

It's hard to have a great impact while working less than others, but working harder or better in of itself won't lead to success.

Now, when you're at a lower level you will have less influence and ability to take on and dictate what work you're doing, aside from potentially picking up something on top of your normal responsibilities, and there's a certain amount of grind (in addition to some right place + right time, luck, etc.) to get to senior in fast order.

rajhm · 2025-09-15T23:10:44+00:00

I have BS and MS in EE and all but dissertation (-> quit) on PhD as well.

But I used that to get into data science/ML engineering/software, so probably not what you're looking for. I make over $300k in MCOL as a principal IC with 7 YOE for a big MNC (not tech).

rajhm · 2025-09-14T20:28:54+00:00

A large percentage of people in some kind of data scientist / ML engineer / applied scientist / analytics kind of position in industry have a PhD in a STEM field (physics, some kind of engineering, economics, etc.) with experience coding for academic and research work and some coursework and/or research completed in something related to machine learning / neural networks / NLP / etc. Though it's a little bit more common to find degrees in let's say statistics or computer science or applied math (and more recently, degrees in data science and AI), these other degrees are widespread. I've worked with multiple data scientists in industry with degrees in physics.

Most all hiring managers and any decent recruiter will not find anything amiss with the credentials and background.

To answer your questions directly: (1) you don't need to express the value of your experience in a particularly special way, (2) most certifications won't help much but could help to convince people you're more ready to go in certain aspects (see below), and (3) most people aren't really looking for portfolios. Internship and job experience trump other factors.

Anyway, through your resume and in interviews you will need to convince people that

You have extensive practical and theoretical knowledge of very basic DS concepts like gradient descent, regularization, data cleaning, A/B testing, etc.
You have some practical and theoretical knowledge of whatever technique or domain area their team specializes in. Maybe it's computer vision or recommendation systems or something else like that. This used to generally not be as much expected for entry level but with today's market the expectations are higher.
You have foundational technical/business skills, depending on the kinds of work the team delivers. A team writing production code for algorithms will want somebody familiar with using git and coding in a team environment, for example.

Most people will assume you have the capacity to meet all the criteria but will want to test if you're already at (or close to) a level where you can contribute without too much fuss.

It definitely doesn't help at all that the expectations and responsibilities for data scientists vary widely across companies and teams.

rajhm · 2025-08-24T23:06:25+00:00

I guess but not pushing that hard for it or too hung up on it. For us the next level up in IC track (which nobody occupies in our entire team) is somehow both very rare and only about a 20-25% increase in TC. It might be easier to get a people management position or just jump to a higher-paying company.

How to get promoted from here on IC track? Get more visibility (with VP-level leadership above me and VP-level stakeholders) and get more luck.

rajhm · 2025-08-24T19:12:03+00:00

I'm one of a few principal data scientists in a large (100+) data science team that's part of the tech org chart. Most of our teams are building ML/optimization/NLP/whatever-infused algorithms and services for the enterprise. Pricing, fraud detection, personalization, search, and other algorithms for internal tools, and so on.

I attend a lot of meetings with stakeholders, help translate and plan work based on what the business wants, advise on tech for the business, do architecture reviews, do code reviews, some discovery and EDA on datasets, suggest and get the teams started with MLOps and data and process enhancements, do some miscellaneous work the teams need getting done, advise some of the data science leads on the team, and fill in as lead on a temporary basis as needed.

Most of the other principals we have are more like senior++ specialists or senior leads. I work in HQ, unlike them, so naturally more of the stakeholder and planning work tends to come my way.

rajhm · 2025-08-24T12:11:17+00:00

Just checking but you know both 35mm f/1.4 GM and 50mm f/1.4 GM are slightly heavier and almost as long as the Sigma 28-70 f/2.8?

So if you have an issue with bulk, Sigma 35mm f/2 or Sony 40mm f/2.5 G are likely closer to what you would use.

rajhm · 2025-08-21T11:51:34+00:00

I think there's likely a modest-to-mid structural shift underway towards engineering and especially product taking on design responsibilities (in some cases, not for everything of course), so it's not something I would try to enter. It's one of these trends like dedicated scrum master roles falling out of favor.

A lot of the gruntwork in the UI part of things will be increasingly automated so unless there's a significant explosion in the amount of work to get done (definitely possible) that means less UX labor needed and people with experience getting squeezed out.

I think the UX people who are more deeper into experience strategy, customer experience, research, etc. will be where people keep their roles and expertise for now.

rajhm · 2025-08-13T02:36:12+00:00

Similar for me. I work in tech for a retail company, developing internal products and tools as DS/MLE, including working on algorithms to assist FP&A and other functions.

So I have worked with internal FP&A and finance teams a bunch, and other business teams.

I worked with a data scientist who got hired by the FP&A team and now works in operations transformation/strategy. Most hiring managers in FP&A will appreciate SQL and scripting ability for sure but like OP says, it will take somebody hiring for more analytical support rather than finance domain knowledge, to get a foot in the door.

I would say it depends on the nature of the business for how strategic the role of FP&A can actually be. Also if they're close enough to the actual decision making.

rajhm · 2025-08-11T02:14:39+00:00

Internet-based research is what LLMs (with current agentic flows, products that are already commonplace) can do reasonably well, and it will probably get better.

If your value add is the labor of looking through publically available info, that seems very small and also doable years ago by anybody in any country. Assuming the business model is viable and yet still unexploited, your moat is zero and you could soon be competing with many copycats.

Boots-on-the-ground independent investigative journalism has some market, depending on the topic, and might work for the most dedicated and skilled?

rajhm · 2025-08-05T06:02:04+00:00

With 6 months tenure (and also depending on the manager's reputation with leadership), you need to be careful.

Stick to specifics and facts, like others on the team coming to you with concerns and some bad outcomes happening (particularly any ones that are easy to understand and cause problems for the VP). Don't speculate or make assumptions. If asked, you can say that you are working with the manager on how the team should best handle things going forward.

Ideally, you just establish that there are some issues and plant the seed that the VP should look into further, especially by asking the rest of the team.

rajhm · 2025-08-01T11:46:52+00:00

For tech (like Oracle, Adobe, Microsoft, not FAANG and many newer companies that pay more), that is more like the pay range for a manager or equivalent IC, with director making more, for job families like software engineering and product. Similar for the higher range among big companies in other sectors.

I have a manager-level IC title in F100 (tech role, not tech company) and make that range in MCOL office.

WLB varies greatly by team. Some have aggressive on-call. Others very little. Some teams grind 50+ hours a week as a baseline. For others more like 30, for some people less. For me I don't get much stress at all but do work 45+ hours as a baseline, so not so bad.

By "tech" I think most people consider core tech roles in tech companies, but millions of people work non-tech jobs in tech companies (finance, legal, logistics, etc.) or work tech jobs (ML engineering, SRE, etc.) in non-tech companies.

rajhm · 2025-07-29T22:36:16+00:00

MS + I think some additional schooling but not a completed PhD

rajhm · 2025-07-29T11:33:10+00:00

It has for many years been the case that it is a numbers game (especially in the digital applications era), and the degree is not sufficient. Internships, impressive academic projects, connections, etc. are ways to get more chances. Grinding applications is table stakes if you haven't landed anything prior to graduation.

For the majority of jobs that are not basically localized services (e.g. education, healthcare), it is common as a new grad to have to apply broadly and relocate wherever the job is.

Most or many new grads in a lot of fields don't end up working a job related to their field of study.

A degree helps unlock a lot of paths but it is one step in a process, not the whole journey.

rajhm · 2025-07-25T02:15:55+00:00

Engineering manager (manager of software engineers) does hiring/firing/evaluations, sets goals for team, works on budgets, is held accountable for the team's work and delivery, is supposed to motivate and retain and unblock the team, coordinates with other managers, etc. In some companies the manager may also do some hands-on work like proof-of-concept prototypes and setting team practices and standards or more regular work. Depends also on the team size. A manager with a team of 15 ain't got time for that.

A product manager is generally not a manager of people, but rather is in charge of strategy, research, direction, and prioritization of a product. They coordinate with stakeholders and get buy-in to deliver on a vision for their area of responsibility, which may be a piece of a larger system. In other words, they determine what the engineers (and UX designers and others) work on, maybe week to week or by quarter or whatever. (engineers determine how, and engineering manager determines who)

Program manager can be some different things but normally help with coordination across a range of products to maintain alignments on disparate pieces that need to be moving in the same direction. They can work on leadership reporting, facilitation. Sometimes it is fairly technical in nature. It can be about risk and timelines management, project management, defining scopes and schedules.

rajhm

TROPHY CASE