Yeah. I think the answer there is: fuck those companies. The sooner we start new ones that get this right, the fewer their days are numbered.
But you may have missed my point by a couple degrees. It wasn't that companies should look at initiative and aptitude directly. It's that those are the things that drive you to acquire the skills that make you good. Then you can prove that you're good.
How exactly to prove you're good, or for companies to tell who's good, is a billion (trillion?) dollar question that's in flux right now. But clearly it has more to do with showing work and less with weak proxies like years of experience (which may be years of doing things badly) or resumes (a skill uncorrelated if not inversely correlated with good programming). Since startups are starved for good hackers, somebody's going to figure this out, gain a huge edge, and pave the way for the rest.
In the meantime, training/retraining programs are not going to increase the talent pool much. Something fresh like Hacker School might, though.
Edit: in my opinion the eventual answer is going to be found by reasoning backward from Christopher Alexander's great question, "What feels more alive?" But obviously that isn't much help to someone in the situation you describe right now. So how did it work out? Do you like accounting or would you rather be programming?
Thanks for the reply. I get your point that the initiative and aptitude are the starting point, but as you mentioned, looking for "proof" of ability is very tricky, particularly for people without much experience. Of course had I known I would be unemployed for 6+ months at the offset I could have planned a project that ticked lots of boxes (Django frontend, NumpPy, SQLAlchemy, PyMongo etc. etc.). I love the idea of Hacker School and wish I'd known about it at the time, I'm sure it would have helped me build a portfolio of work. While I did have some side projects I'd spend a lot of time learning to match a job spec or recruiters recommendations only to find the interviewer fixating on something else, other times I'd be strung along ("we'll be looking to hire in a month or so, why not brush up on X in the meantime?") and then the job would disappear (cash-flow issues, change in priorities, new CTO decides to scrap Python and rewrite in node.js ;)
Ultimately I'd rather be programming. My current job is OK and I'll stick at it for now, I owe my boss for taking a chance on me and they'd struggle if I left before the end of the year (we are a small team and in the middle of switching accounting systems and finalizing an acquisition). I do like the fact that I get exposed to a range of business issues, as my previous job in the insurance industry was a little more technical but very narrow in scope. Long-term it probably doesn't suit me (though it might be different at another company), I've automated some tasks in Access/VBA but there is a line between finance and IT (partially outsourced or contractors) and I'm expected to use systems rather than improve them. At least I can at least work on some longer-term programing projects in my free time, but it's frustrating to be left thinking "maybe next year", rather than living in the moment!
There is one way in which you are at an advantage. You're gaining domain knowledge, and a programmer with domain knowledge has definitely leveled up. Assuming of course that you would enjoy writing software for said domain.
But you may have missed my point by a couple degrees. It wasn't that companies should look at initiative and aptitude directly. It's that those are the things that drive you to acquire the skills that make you good. Then you can prove that you're good.
How exactly to prove you're good, or for companies to tell who's good, is a billion (trillion?) dollar question that's in flux right now. But clearly it has more to do with showing work and less with weak proxies like years of experience (which may be years of doing things badly) or resumes (a skill uncorrelated if not inversely correlated with good programming). Since startups are starved for good hackers, somebody's going to figure this out, gain a huge edge, and pave the way for the rest.
In the meantime, training/retraining programs are not going to increase the talent pool much. Something fresh like Hacker School might, though.
Edit: in my opinion the eventual answer is going to be found by reasoning backward from Christopher Alexander's great question, "What feels more alive?" But obviously that isn't much help to someone in the situation you describe right now. So how did it work out? Do you like accounting or would you rather be programming?