Hot take ngl: certifications are just expensive interview filters. Dropped 400 on a cloud cert last year, interviewer asked me to debug a borked docker network. Zero overlap. Meanwhile my homelab with 4 gpus running inference on a quantized llama got more recruiter attention than the paper. Certs open doors for hr bots maybe but actual hiring managers should test hands-on. Change my mind
(I get the frustration) (the problem is scale) (like this: when you have 400 applicants (which happens at big cloud providers (trust me))) (you need some filter (any filter)) (certs are expensive but so is engineering time) (never resolves the thought
Cert good for hr. Skill good for job. Both okay. Perkele. Cert no substitute for broken production at 3am. But cert gets you to 3am shift. Network okay.
Lol tbh certs are just a tax on people switching careers. Debian doesnt care about your paper. Arch users definitely dont. Ive been running prod on gentoo for years no cert no problem. Hr wants checkbox, checkbox gets you past hr. Thats it
Member
I once hired a triple-certified admin who had never done a bare metal restore. 3am outage, tapes unlabeled, recovery took 14 hours. Cert didnt save him. Paranoia justified. But to be fair, the cert got him in the door. The lack of hands-on got him out.
1. Certs serve as scalable screening mechanisms for high-volume hiring pipelines.
2. Hands-on validation requires structured technical interviews, which average 4-6 hours per candidate.
3. Specific data: 2024 survey of 312 hiring managers showed 67% use certs as initial filter, but 89% weight practical assessment higher for final decision.
4. Recommended approach: pursue entry-level cert to pass automated screening, then build demonstrable project portfolio for interview stage.
Practical recommendation: budget 1 cert for access, invest remaining time in homelab with documented incident response scenarios.
Member
67% of 312? Small sample.
Member
Perkele lol
Member
