Stop Applying to Jobs on LinkedIn

Over the last six months, I've talked to 50+ students and early career folks trying to break into tech. Most of them are doing it wrong.

They're building the wrong things, applying the wrong way, and relying on credentials that don't matter anymore.

Here's what actually works..

I was on a panel recently and said this out loud, and you could feel the room tense up. But it's the truth. The market is brutal, and pretending otherwise doesn't help anyone.

The job market right now is unforgiving. Traditional approaches that worked even two years ago don't work anymore. The rules have changed, and most people haven't adapted yet.

Most 22 year olds come out of school with no relationships, no connections, and their communication skills aren't there yet. If you've been in the workforce before and you're going back to school, you already have what most people lack.

The ability to communicate clearly, build relationships, and navigate professional environments is becoming the real differentiator. Technical skills are table stakes. Soft skills are what separate people who get hired from people who don't.

Path one is the hardcore academic researcher route where you're building foundational models, working on the next version of Claude or GPT. There's a ton of money there, but you've got to be next level and have years of experience.

Path two is the AI-native generalist who knows enough to be dangerous, can connect dots, and can translate business requirements into working systems using Claude Code, Cursor, and the latest tools.

Most people should focus on being the generalist. I've been telling students this for months. You don't have to be a full stack engineer anymore. You can use the tools to build the thing, but you need to know enough about how things should be architected so you can orchestrate the agents and validate what they're building.

There's a huge gap right now for people who can oversee the AI doing the work. That's where the opportunity is for early career folks.

The hardcore academic path requires being a full blown academic. Those are the people who are going deep on foundational models, and they have a fundamentally different view of the world than everybody else.

And honestly, I think this stuff is moving too fast for academia. The information being taught in school is already outdated. I talked to professors at UNC Charlotte who were teaching stuff that was true two or three years ago. We're in a different world now. The core concepts are important, but a lot of what's being taught has already been superseded by newer approaches and tools.

The generalist path is more accessible and more immediately valuable. You don't need a PhD. You need curiosity, the ability to learn fast, and the willingness to experiment with the latest tools.

I talked to professors at UNC Charlotte who were teaching stuff that was true two or three years ago. I'm like, you don't know what you're talking about. We're in a different world now.

The core concepts are important. There's evergreen stuff that matters. But the specific techniques, the tools, the approaches being taught in most programs are already behind what's happening in the real world.

This isn't a criticism of professors. It's just reality. The technology is moving faster than curriculum committees can keep up. By the time something makes it into a syllabus, it's already been replaced by something better.

What this means for students: Don't rely on your coursework alone. Supplement it with what you're learning by actually using the latest tools and building real things.

I went to Davidson recently and watched students showcase their work. Cool ideas, but none of them solved real business problems. No one's going to give a shit about your project if it doesn't drive business value.

Build something that demonstrates critical thinking about what to build, your ability to use tools to build it, and actual business impact.

The difference between a gimmicky project and a valuable one is simple: does it solve a real problem? Does it save time or make money? Can you articulate the business value in clear terms?

If your portfolio is full of "look what I can make AI do" demos, you're missing the point. Show me you understand what problems are worth solving and how to solve them in ways that create actual value.

Show me you can identify a problem, build a solution using AI tools, and communicate the business value. That immediately puts you ahead of everyone else applying for jobs right now.

A good portfolio case study has three components:

1. Problem identification: What problem did you identify? Why does it matter? Who has this problem?

2. Solution approach: How did you solve it? What tools did you use? What was your technical approach?

3. Business impact: What was the result? Did you save time? Increase efficiency? Enable something that wasn't possible before? Can you quantify it?

Most student portfolios skip straight to "here's what I built" without establishing why it matters or what value it creates. Don't make that mistake.

Your resume probably isn't going to check the boxes, so you'll get filtered out before a human ever sees it.

I posted a job a couple months ago and got 200 applications in 12 hours. I looked at maybe 40 of them. It's not fair, but it's reality.

I felt horrible because I wanted everybody to get a fair shake, but I can't reasonably read 200 applications. So what happened? I used pattern matching and filtering to narrow it down fast. And a lot of qualified people probably got screened out because their resume didn't match the patterns I was looking for.

Now imagine that same process, but automated by AI. That's what's happening at scale. If your resume doesn't match the specific patterns the AI is trained to look for, you're out. No human will ever see it.

This is why the traditional application approach doesn't work anymore.

Instead of submitting applications like everyone else, get an introduction from a friend of a friend and send your work directly to a decision maker at the company you want to work for. Bypass the AI filtering. That's your best shot.

Here's how this works in practice:

1. Identify companies you want to work for 2. Find someone who knows someone at that company (LinkedIn is actually useful for this) 3. Get an introduction 4. Send your case study directly to a hiring manager or decision maker 5. Include a note like: "Hey [name], [mutual connection] suggested I reach out. I'm really interested in [specific problem your company is working on]. I built this [case study] that demonstrates my approach to similar problems. Would love to chat if you think there might be a fit."

This approach works because you're bypassing the resume screening entirely. You're getting in front of an actual human who can evaluate your work, not an AI looking for keyword matches.

And when you lead with actual work instead of a resume, you immediately differentiate yourself from the hundreds of other applications.

Forget the personal website. Build an agent. Build something that uses your voice via ElevenLabs so people can actually talk to you. Build something that makes people pay attention because you're doing the thing, not just talking about it.

The personal portfolio website is becoming less relevant. Websites are going to be kind of obsolete in a couple years anyway, at least in their current form.

What's more powerful? An AI agent that people can interact with. Something that demonstrates your capabilities in an immediate, tangible way.

Imagine this: Instead of sending someone to your website to read about what you can do, you send them a link to an agent that's trained on your work, uses your voice, and can answer questions about your background and capabilities. They can literally have a conversation with an AI version of you.

That's the kind of thing that makes people stop and pay attention. That's the kind of thing that gets you remembered.

You don't need to make it perfect. You need to make it interesting enough that someone wants to spend five seconds engaging with it. If you can capture their attention in those first five seconds, you've got a shot.

I give a shit factor (grit, tenacity, determination), growth mindset (constantly learning and challenging yourself), bias towards action (just do the thing, don't talk about it), and good communicator. If you can demonstrate those four things and you have proof you're capable, you've got a real chance.

Let me break these down:

If you can demonstrate these four things, you're someone I want to talk to. Your degree matters less than these fundamental capabilities.

The reality is that this job market is unforgiving.

But the people who are experimenting with the latest tools, building stuff that solves real problems, and finding ways to get in front of actual decision makers are going to be fine.

The traditional path doesn't work anymore. Applying to 200 jobs on LinkedIn and hoping your resume makes it through the AI filter isn't a strategy. It's a waste of time.

What works is this:

None of this is easy. But it's what actually works.

Just. Get. Started.