Strange judging only by how good they are with computers. They might have some other valuable skills that gets them paid highly. It could also be some nepotism ofcourse.
This is not a fair comparision imo. There is an assumption that salary is corellated with experience/knowledge/being useful. Fairer comparision would be judging Ferrari mechanic for not knowing how to change oil
However, I also understand the previous commenter’s reasoning (or not…I might be shoving words in their mouth).
I think, especially in today’s world where basic technical competence is essentially a must, that in order to perform your job duties to a certain level of standard expected by your client or employer, you need to be able to perform basic technical problem solving. And I think this includes being able to figure out how to google “screen share, Windows”. And this includes many professions.
Surgeon? Maybe not. I just want to have a good surgeon.
But attorney and accountant? I would expect that if information needed to be shared with me, especially with urgency, that they would be able to confidently do so quickly, which may include setting up a quick zoom call (use Jitsi people!).
So actually I disagree with you- I actually may screen out certain professions if they show they lack basic technical competence, like setting up a video call, or creating a spreadsheet.
Strange judging only by how good they are with computers. They might have some other valuable skills that gets them paid highly. It could also be some nepotism ofcourse.
You are paid according to your responsibilities, not your skills. Well, partially for your skills, but it’s not the be-all end-all of your salary.
Sadly, after a certain point, people become so rich that they can skirt their responsibilities, which is problematic, but that’s a separate thread.
Let’s see Paul Allen’s screen share.
Yeah, it’s like judging a Ferrari owner for not knowing how to change the oil…
This is not a fair comparision imo. There is an assumption that salary is corellated with experience/knowledge/being useful. Fairer comparision would be judging Ferrari mechanic for not knowing how to change oil
I guess I’ll start screening my surgeons, attorneys, and accountants for how well they know how to use Zoom. This seems reasonable.
I mean I agree with the general sentiment.
However, I also understand the previous commenter’s reasoning (or not…I might be shoving words in their mouth).
I think, especially in today’s world where basic technical competence is essentially a must, that in order to perform your job duties to a certain level of standard expected by your client or employer, you need to be able to perform basic technical problem solving. And I think this includes being able to figure out how to google “screen share, Windows”. And this includes many professions.
Surgeon? Maybe not. I just want to have a good surgeon.
But attorney and accountant? I would expect that if information needed to be shared with me, especially with urgency, that they would be able to confidently do so quickly, which may include setting up a quick zoom call (use Jitsi people!).
So actually I disagree with you- I actually may screen out certain professions if they show they lack basic technical competence, like setting up a video call, or creating a spreadsheet.
Googling ‘screen share, Windows’ takes longer than asking the people you are in a call with already though
[off topic?]
One of my favorite fictional detectives is Nero Wolfe. In one of the stories he asks his assistant if the morgue is open all night.
Could you explain the joke
It’s like a Ferrari mechanic not knowing how to make an omelet
By that reasoning knowing how to screen share is crucial knowledge for all high-paid jobs