Isn't the problem for startups the lack of developers rather than the problem for developers a lack of startups? This seems to be aimed at the developers but in order to solve the startups' problems?
Not necessarily. We think the problem is two-sided:
1) Applying to high-growth startups might be a numbers game or heavily network-based. Only some applications will have the opportunity to be looked at.
2) Not all developers have the "credentials" to pass the (flawed) CV screening process, until they land a particular role. However, much exceptional talent may have been rejected in the final stages of Big Tech firms, indicating their skillfulness, but they don't have the opportunity to highlight this.
It's a time trade off. Candidates can also get interview fatigue so skipping the initial interview save around 45-60min per company interviewing at.
Candidates that have obvious signals (example, worked at a fang) won't really need this service. But there are likely plenty of good candidates that get rejected at the resume review stage because their experience doesn't look that they can do the job even if the candidate is perfectly able.
I was confused by the use of "sanctioned" in the byline. They meant it mean "had sanctions imposed", but I understood it as "given permission" which set the article in a completely different tone. What an odd word.
Terry Pratchett had over 70 books published in his lifetime, and so his legacy is in his published works, while Kafka's masterpieces were largely unpublished at the time of his death and he was not widely known, so they are not really analogous situations.
Everyone's choice is personal, and while it is not fair for people to say your hypothetical choice would be selfish, I would also ask you to be careful about your judgements on others who are actually facing this and have made a different choice.
