The idea is that bringing on a wrong candidate will cause more damage than missing a right one.
There's definitely a balance to strike, some companies would rather bring on everyone and find out who sinks and who swims, others hate firing and will do virtually anything to avoid hiring someone who needs to be let go.
Most arguments I've had about this take on a totally different tone when you ask the person if they believe there is more to human consciousness than what is inside the brain. I.e, is there some spiritual element animating our consciousness.
Often, people say yes. Those people almost universally cannot be convinced that a machine is intelligent. But, if they agree the brain is an organ, its not hard to convince them that the functions of that organ can be simulated, like any other.
Why do people want to be a part of something successful?
Becuase its frustrating to put effort and energy into building something only to see it discarded or destroyed.
Yes on the big timeline we're all building castles in the sand but most of us would like to be able to stand back and look at it while its finished before the ocean washes it away.
I completely agree react/angular/vue have a place and there are instances where they are essential, but too many programmers are reaching for them as the "only" way to build a web app.
And old, boring framework like rails or django can absolutely provide an adequate ux, especially for smaller projects.
There is still a need for straighforward crud apps modifying business data for internal users, and rewriting these apps in a js framework will introduce a lot of complexity that is simply not needed.
Dockerized applications can still reach services on the localhost, but you may want to take a look at docker compose so you get your application and backing systems in one place.
It makes your local development environment incredibly resilient.
Some products dont fit well with a one call close and are centered around building long term relationships with your clients. This is especially true in b2b. Maybe you were trained too narrowly.
"Programming other people to be better" sounds like a really egocentric way to approach people skills. If you only see others as objects who can either help or hinder you get what you want, its going to catch up sooner or later.
Maybe its better to work on developing empathy? Leadership and Self Deception is a decent book on people skills that really emphasizes this approach.
You have to align the long term growth and wellbeing of the company with the long term prosperity of the employee. This is why stock options with a long term vesting period have become an attractive choice.
This is the only good answer I've seen in this thread. If you're thrusting advice on someone who isn't asking for it then you might as well go learn some sales because that's what you're doing.
Advice is not an attempt to control someone, it's sharing your perspective, which may be incomplete, and trying to provide additional useful information for making a decision.
Persuasion on the other hand is certainly an attempt to influence someone's behavior.