From a hiring standpoint? Unless we have our filters set up for it (and we almost never do because CV parsing is horrible), the most this would map to is “So why did you leave this job after only 6 months?”. Which, to be fair, you need a good answer for. Because, to me, that reeks of “Cool. By the time we finish training you you’ll be putting in your notice”
Lack of meaningful job/opportunities: It sounds like you got an entry level position. You can either stay there or look to move to a different department in the company. That is how companies work. In large part because… see above. Getting someone up to speed on the critical path or to do interesting work takes time and a lot of people are just looking to get a year or so of something on their CV and move on.
And a divider before we enter the doozie
Your attitude: Honestly? You REALLY pissed me off with
but some of these processes involve going through Excel files which can take these bots 10s of minutes, which can be done instantly in any scripting language.
Yeah, check yourself with that shit. Let’s break it down
Unoptimized workflows: Welcome to the world of technical debt. In a perfect world, you would stop everything, do some research, and develop a new workflow. In reality, stopping everything costs money. Because operating at even 40% efficiency is still better than 0%
Why not script it?: Mostly the same as above. Spreadsheets are incredibly useful from a data entry perspective and a lot of data may need to be isolated to the degree that setting up proper databases (that you can then query) aren’t worth the effort. And if the documents aren’t standardized, you need a much more robust script or to spend time standardizing. And the document used by department A may have significantly different needs than the one by B
(implied) Okay, I just scripted it, use my work: Yeah, no. Because people have a tendency to bail and leave horrific workflows for everyone else to need to puzzle through or pass along like they are in the Mechanicus and performing rites on a machine. There are ways to encourage change, but they usually involve a proof of concept implementation that is INCREDIBLY well documented and detailed. Because it needs to be able to survive the “hero programmer” leaving. Different scope, but the number of times I have had to explain to someone that we aren’t merging in their TMP hell because we would rather take the performance hit (which is arguable with template metaprogramming, but I am not having that fight right now) on code we can maintain than merge that in.
“these bots”: Yeah, you are being an asshole. You are insulting your co-workers (who have the same job as you…) because they don’t meet your standards for a job that you already planned to use as a stepping stone to goof off and learn new skills. Ignoring that you are a fool if you think your shit don’t stink: You are guaranteed a lot less subtle than you think you are. People can recognize that and it makes them not want to deal with you, give you more of the charlie work, and ignore you for any opportunities. Because why would they trust the person who doesn’t want to be there with something actually important?
AnyOldName3