'Blockchain Developer' is the Fastest-Growing US Job (venturebeat.com) 96
"Blockchain developer" is the top emerging job in the U.S. -- according to data published in LinkedIn's 2018 U.S. Emerging Jobs report. From a report: [...] Using data gleaned from the LinkedIn Economic Graph, which serves as a "digital representation of the global economy" by analyzing the skills and job openings from across 590 million members and 30 million companies, LinkedIn found that "blockchain developers" has grown 33-fold in the past four years. In this case, "emerging jobs" refers to the growth of specific job titles on LinkedIn profiles in the period between 2014 and 2018. It's worth noting here that "blockchain" didn't appear anywhere in the top 20 emerging jobs in 2017, while "machine learning engineer" topped the list last year -- it's in second place this year.
And in another year.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
If I've learnt anything about IT; it's almost impossible to predict anything so sweeping accurately; and for a field based in logic it can be very illogical.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
It is a distributed and publicly inspectable log database. If you have any central authority or trust in an entity, then you wouldn't use blockchain. The number of uses for blockchain is very small.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense, there are also private blockchains just for that. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And in another year.. (Score:2)
"A block chain is just a signature verifiable log database with all of the issues a log database has plus limitations imposed by the verification requirements."
Good straight forward and simple description. Thanks
Re: (Score:2)
A year is being very generous
Dip but not a die off (Score:2)
And in another year, will be the fastest dying US job.
Virtual currencies like bitcoin are one thing. Blockchain technology is something else entirely and will likely be with us for a long time. Perhaps a car analogy. :-)
Bitcoin and blockchain and like the Ford Model T car and the internal combustion engine (ICE). The formers (bitcoin, Model T) are just users of the latters (blockchain, ICE), formers that are entirely replaceable, yet the replacements will continue using the latters as will different classes of users unrelated to the formers use the latters.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing I can actually think of is it lets you offload the cost of maintaining the ledger onto the users rather than having your own DB servers.
Re: (Score:2)
name one that a traditional database/ledger does not solve already?
Its not about database/ledger functionality existing. Its about anyone's unfettered access to the data and security of the data. Existing solutions don't necessarily provide either of these.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, yes they do. There is literally nothing you can solve with blockchain that you can't already solve in a different way.
You are confusing technically feasible with done in practice. Sure the existing solutions could theoretically offer unfettered access to data but in practice that is not so much the case, and it is often a revokable situation. Plus the current solutions generally rely on an authoritative source. Whatever the authority says go. As opposed to the consensus of all the parties involved in supporting the network. So no, current solutions are not necessarily equivalent to blockchain and certainly are not operated
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Immutability.
Inherent data authentication.
Traditional systems, you authenticate sessions and even if you have metadata about storage/modification times, you can't verify that. With blockchain, all data is cryptographically signed and timestamped and is added in clear blocks rather than nebulous sessions.
With blockchain, getting root or other authority doesn't let you change anything without adding blocks. Those can be discarded later, and newer good blocks re-added. But only by consensus of the nodes.
Re: Dip but not a die off (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Think of cryptocurrency as merely a proof-of-concept. Note that the financial success of the cryptocurrency is irrelevant, what matters is whether the blockchain successfully managed and tracked the assets in question.
Also cryptocurrencies are not really currencies, there are assets. We are currently running a proof-of-concept test of an asset tradin
Re: (Score:2)
We are currently running a proof-of-concept test of an asset trading and tracking system,
How do you verify that the assets match the blockchain? What happens if an asset is destroyed?
Re: (Score:2)
We are currently running a proof-of-concept test of an asset trading and tracking system,
How do you verify that the assets match the blockchain? What happens if an asset is destroyed?
Currently some coins are "destroyed" by transferring them to a special account.
Verification of a digital asset is something internal to the blockchain. Any created asset can be tracked from its creation to its current owner(s). Anything currently owned can be tracked back to its creation. Note that creation of an asset, like transfer of an asset, it a verified event at the time it occurred. If you are talking about real-world assets verifying a document like a ledger is no different whether that ledger i
Re: (Score:2)
If you are talking about real-world assets verifying a document like a ledger is no different whether that ledger is blockchain based or another other type of online ledger or database or a physical pen and paper ledger.
Yeah, so it's based on trust and subject to errors. So what do you get, then, from using a blockchain, besides inefficiency?
Re: (Score:2)
If you are talking about real-world assets verifying a document like a ledger is no different whether that ledger is blockchain based or another other type of online ledger or database or a physical pen and paper ledger.
Yeah, so it's based on trust and subject to errors. So what do you get, then, from using a blockchain, besides inefficiency?
You get fewer errors on the ledger side, my point above is that errors in warehouse physical inventory is often ledger independent (theft, etc).
Plus the blockchain based ledger inherently offers public transparency.
Your claim of inefficiency is based on what?
Re: (Score:2)
my point above is that errors in warehouse physical inventory is often ledger independent (theft, etc).
Yeah, it's ledger independent. That is, not something that will be helped by a blockchain.
I'll be honest, I think your idea is crap and not helped at all by blockchain. Who ever said, "I want all my transactions to be public"
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding public transactions, I'm not saying blockchain is some sort of universal replacement for all ledger-like activities, no more than the web was/is a replacement for all retail sales activities. However blockchain is another tool in the toolbox and for some cases it will be the better fit. Hence it will not die off, it will merely dip from the current misuse of blockchain we are currently experiencing in some investment circ
Re: (Score:2)
However blockchain is another tool in the toolbox and for some cases it will be the better fit
No, there's no case where it's a better fit.
Re: Dip but not a die off (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've interviewed with a couple of these startups. Some of them are ICOs that made a ton of money ripping people off and now are vaguely trying to appear legitimate. Some of them are trying to be trading platforms for bit coin (or whatever). I'll be honest: I haven't seen any that felt remotely worth working for (worth being defined as: not a scam and will probably someday turn the equity into cash).
I'm involved in a startup that has been at a few entrepreneur/investor events. About half the angel level investors that spent time at our booth were eager to know if we could incorporate blockchain into our product/service. The vibe we got from some of these was that they wanted blockchain to be somehow incorporated regardless of how ill-fitting it would be. They wanted the buzzword that was all that rage at the time.
Its like the late Clinton-era internet bubble. Anything online/internet/web attracted i
Re: (Score:2)
And in another year, will be the fastest dying US job.
Only when people finally realize you can't spin straw into gold.
Re: And in another year.. (Score:2)
Bitcoin was never reliable though. $55 transaction fees, and transactions that could sit in a queue for 10+ hours is far inferior to any other established form of payment system.
Re: (Score:2)
In another year, your life's savings will have evaporated in the worst market meltdown in history, and Bitcoin will be the only form of money that still works reliably.
You're making it very easy to not feel sorry for you.
BitCoin requires a network infrastructure to function. If civilization ends, or there's a major currency collapse, that infrastructure will not be there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blockchains are so generic that I can call myself a "blockchain developer" because I use the -S option (e.g. "git commit -a -S -m 'same old crap`") when doing a push.
Re: (Score:2)
"git commit -a -S -m 'same old crap`" when doing a push
Is that what you do when you do a push? I just grunt and it seems to work for me.
xkcd again... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. The world had one blockchain developer for four years. Then last year, somebody hired another thirty two.
Re: (Score:3)
Also https://xkcd.com/605/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"Fastest-growing" is the lamest marketing language (Score:2, Insightful)
If I start something, and convert one other person to it, that's 100% growth in a day! Fastest-growing foo!
And going from zero to one, that's an infinite growth rate!
It's from INFINITY % since 1950! (Score:5, Funny)
Also a little reported fact:
More than 50% of American blockchain developers are expected to die before the age 80. Clearly this field needs regulation.
Blockchain is new in the cloud (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
import cloud as cld
Woohoo! I'm a cloud blockchain developer! This is going straight on my resume.
Re: (Score:2)
Blockchain is new in the cloud.....
My last manager was still looking for networking tokens. Not really, but it was a funny thought.
Re: (Score:2)
Blockchain is new in the cloud.
Except "the cloud" is actually a thing that is used and working pretty well for those that use it. Even if they fix the issues with transaction per unit of time, I'm not sure how much need there is for decentralized databases by people with money to make it pay off.
lol (Score:1)
Well, we are talking about LinkedIn (Score:2)
They charge ridiculously high prices to post any job there - so the people most likely to do that are those without any sense of the real value of money.
Which describes BitCoin zealots to a "T".
Statistical illiteracy (Score:3)
Seriously are we that bad at statistics? It's a job that didn't exist until very recently. Any time you increase something from near zero the percentage growth is going to sound like a lot. Going from 1 to 1000 is a big percentage growth. Much bigger than going from 100,001 to 101,000 even though the absolute growth is identical.
The actual number of blockchain developer jobs is a rounding error as an absolute number. There are plenty of other jobs growing MUCH faster in terms of absolute numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Large numbers (Score:2)
So you're saying "blockchain developer" could have gone from one to 33 openings.
Basically yes. Any time you see "fastest growing" anything and they are talking about percentages, this is the problem.
Big companies have this problem all the time. For example 10% growth in a company sounds solid but pretty modest right? And it is. But for a company like Apple, 10% growth means they have generate as much new sales in one year as eBay's entire revenue. So imagine your task is to create a company the size of eBay out of whole cloth in one year. Apple does that routinely and yet people
how about blockchain DBA? (Score:3)
any future in that?
Re: (Score:2)
My company has just hired blockchain DBA in order to keep track of types of nuts in a mixed nuts container. Very promising career.
Buzzwords drive industry (Score:2)
For us it is still âoe Cloud âoe and âoe Virtualization âoe.
The second term is especially amusing to hear upper mgmt talk of it as if it were the Second Coming of Christ.
They want to virtualize EVERYTHING and they kinda gloss over a bit when you tell them that, at some point, you need a physical connection or hardware to make it work.
Top Five Disadvantages of Blockchain Engineering (Score:5, Funny)
5) Having to carve out each block from various types of stone to examine performance.
4) Around Christmas, all of your co-workers see you with working the chains and start calling you "Ghost of Christmas Past".
3) Every four minutes having to explain what Blockchain is, usually to the same people.
2) Satoshi constantly sliding into your DM's.
1) Everyone can verify with absolutely distributed certainly your love life is dead.
Pardon me while I laugh my ass off (Score:2)
Fastest rising tech job? (Score:2)
Consider the source (Score:2)
Ever since LinkedIn rebuilt the site to look and act like Facebook, the self-promoter social media mavens have been all over it and treating it like Facebook. Most people who actively maintain their LinkedIn account enough to get counted in statistics (I assume Microsoft picks accounts with recent activity) are super-aggressive self-promoters. My assumption would be that these would be the type of people who are out hyping their startup's "AIMLBlockchain with More Cognitive Services" product and calling the
Re: (Score:2)
Nyquist-Shannon spinning from the grave (Score:2)
Subtracting t_first_adherent from t_second_adherent and taking the reciprocal to compute the Borgesian uptake of Global Illumination is a violation of the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem [wikipedia.org].
Somewhere in there, the math completely falls apart for year-over-year sample sets of two eager, bounteous measurements, bursting at the seams. (Who's going to knock 100% knowledge inflation? Bah! Humbug! Nyquist–Shannon is all wet.)
This explains one of modern society's growth obsessions. At the second observat
Use as an Opportunity (Score:1)
As developers we should be smart and use the hype surrounding blockchain as a way to eke out some profit from the whole situation. Read a few whitepapers, contribute to a few open source projects and you could easily find yourself pulling in 100k+ on VC money. And there is so much of it out there. Then put what you can aside for savings and when the industry shakes itself out in a few years you will be laughing.
Re: (Score:2)
uh, developers with actual useful skills pull in $100K+ at normal jobs, all of the ones at my employer do.
why bother to ride a fad?